Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Root Zone Database

iana.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 31 posts

Re: Root Zone Database

#21

Post by dsl »

hayleox wrote: post #9
deathanatos wrote: post #7

Binky Sky, LLC Binky Frostbite, LLC Binky Birch, LLC Binky Galley, LLC Binky Moon, LLC Binky Lake, LLC Binky Glen, LLC Silver Glen, LLC Holly Glen, LLC Grand Glen, LLC Magic Glen, LLC Magic Birch, LLC Magic Woods, LLC Magic Pass, LLC Fern Pass, LLC Big Pass, LLC (snip, as it goes on and on) This reads like someone let their Markov chain register TLDs. Is there a rational explanation that isn't some domain-parking com…

All of those companies are subsidiaries of Donuts: http://www.donuts.domains/ There's a complete list of all their TLDs (and the silly LLC names associated with them) here: https://domaintyper.com/new-gTLD/applicant/Donuts I'm not sure why they formed LLCs for every domain they registered. IANA has lots of regulations and paperwork, and everything is really expensive and slow (it takes years to get a TLD registered).…

Having each TLD application owned by a separate LLC allows the otherwise non-transferable application to be transferred if someone wants to buy .coffee from you.

Re: Root Zone Database

#22

Post by varunvkrishnan »

dastbe wrote: post #4
varunvkrishnan wrote: post #2

The list of domains owned by Google (Charleston Road Registry Inc.) & Amazon (Amazon Registry Services, Inc.) probably give a good idea about their future (predictable) priorities (Google - Ads, Android while Amazon's list looks more shopping oriented) Any ideas on what they they plan on doing with guge & esq domains?

guge is the pinyin for google in china

That makes sense now.. thanks!

Re: Root Zone Database

#23

Post by granda »

dsl wrote: post #20
koolba wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can do that already with uuid.cam.canon.com. At best you save a few characters.

Never co-host real applications and user controlled sites on the same root domain. You're just asking for a neverending stream of problems. (This is why everything ends up on googleusercontent.com and friends instead of google.com)

Can you go into more detail why? I'm curious.

Re: Root Zone Database

#24

Post by wichert »

hayleox wrote: post #10

I don't understand why so many corporations have gone through the very-expensive years-long process of getting their brand name as a TLD, and then proceeded to not use their TLD at all. The only brand name TLD I've seen in real world use is .google ( https://domains.google , https://blog.google ). If you google "site:.whatever" ("whatever" being the TLD you want), you can see all the sites with that TLD that Google k…

Amazon uses their .aws tld as well. For example quicksight is hosted under https://quicksight.aws, and Chime can be found at https://chime.aws

Re: Root Zone Database

#25

Post by koolba »

granda wrote: post #23
dsl wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never co-host real applications and user controlled sites on the same root domain. You're just asking for a neverending stream of problems. (This is why everything ends up on googleusercontent.com and friends instead of google.com)

Can you go into more detail why? I'm curious.

It can lead to security issues with cookie sharing and domain validation.

My example would have been better as .canoncam.com

Re: Root Zone Database

#26

Post by cakeface »

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #13
hayleox wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of those companies are subsidiaries of Donuts: http://www.donuts.domains/ There's a complete list of all their TLDs (and the silly LLC names associated with them) here: https://domaintyper.com/new-gTLD/applicant/Donuts I'm not sure why they formed LLCs for every domain they registered. IANA has lots of regulations and paperwork, and everything is really expensive and slow (it takes years to get a TLD registered).…

It's a common practice for liability isolation in real estate management. Every Carmel property is its own LLC. Maybe similar thinking?

Is Carmel a place or a company? A quick google did not help me and I'm curious.

Re: Root Zone Database

#27

Post by tobyjsullivan »

degenerate wrote: post #14
robalfonso wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.com is still king. It's going to be a while until the others get real penetration. And some tld's are never going to take off. Either the pricing is completely unrealistic or the tld is so long you can achieve the same thing in a shorter tld.

Looking at you, yes you... .international To me, the asinine part of these gTLDs is that companies can register their gTLD with sponsorship ($185K from when I last checked) yet they don't need to sell domains to the public. I understand the idea of exclusivity, but this simply shifts the profiteering racket from one set of players (domain squatters) to another (ICANN and big business). I'm not happy with how they are…

My info may be outdated but what I originally understood was an application for sponsorship had to include details on plans for the gTLD which were subject to approval.

The idea was name brands like .microsoft could be kept private for trademark-protection but other gTLDs like .professional would go to applicants that intended to resell.

Not sure how this ended up in practice though.

Re: Root Zone Database

#28

Post by wheelerwj »

vog wrote: post #11
hayleox wrote: post #10

I don't understand why so many corporations have gone through the very-expensive years-long process of getting their brand name as a TLD, and then proceeded to not use their TLD at all. The only brand name TLD I've seen in real world use is .google ( https://domains.google , https://blog.google ). If you google "site:.whatever" ("whatever" being the TLD you want), you can see all the sites with that TLD that Google k…

> I don't understand why [...] corporations [...] getting their brand name as a TLD, and then [...] not use their TLD I hope this doesn't sound too snarky, but: Maybe they know how worthless that TLD is, and just want to ensure they can't be damaged by competition registering those TLDs. After they secured those, they probably didn't want to waste even more money into that topic.

exactly this. its nothing more than brand/reputation management. 200k is a pretty small sum for the security of that.
Post reply on HN