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

How did .agakhan, .ismaili and .imamat get their own TLDs?

data.iana.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 177 posts

Re: How did .agakhan, .ismaili and .imamat get their own TLDs?

#61

Post by hkt »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #51
827a wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that private entities can monopolize gTLDs, including words that aren't even made-up or reasonably copy-written (e.g. the MAN group in Europe owns .man) was an embarrassing and dishonorable decision by ICANN. I'm all for having tons of weird, awesome gTLDs, and I'm even for brand-specific gTLDs like .google, but the cost these entities should incur by asking for one to be created is: Anyone can use it. 1. A…

how can someone copyright a TLD?

He probably means trademark, eg, .google

Re: How did .agakhan, .ismaili and .imamat get their own TLDs?

#62

Post by postquantumfax »

arcfour wrote: post #55
postquantumfax wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

resolv.conf-> search If you are not a consumer on an ISP emulating dialup it is quite likely that a popular name in a naming convention I.e. 'mercury' resolves to something for you and something for someone at a different firm (mercury.intranet.[firm].not-so-stupid-tld). A cert is possibly not a fully qualified one so when ICANN gives away mercury you need to append .asshat to everything ICANN names. (Two firms have…

Run your own DNS then, if you're using your own DNS? Why are your queries for internal systems leaking out to the internet?

If icann sells www as a tld domain then your use of www as a machine name you may refer to unqualified is a risk because virtually every piece of software in the world respects public issuance until you delete it all if you can.

The DNS naming confusion was largely dealt with by having a small number of TLDs and rarely referring to complex things like partially specified subdomains, but every once in a while a fool named their machine com, org, or net. (Though these as subdomains were far more toxic.)

Re: How did .agakhan, .ismaili and .imamat get their own TLDs?

#63

Post by dc396 »

postquantumfax wrote: post #47
dc396 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you mean by "DNS allows search" -- by the usual definition of "search", the DNS doesn't: it is a lookup mechanism. I'm also not sure who "we" are in your idea or what you mean by "qualified with an end dot": all domains that get looked up implicitly have a "." (a zero length label that signifies the end of the query name) if it isn't explicit.

resolv.conf-> search If you are not a consumer on an ISP emulating dialup it is quite likely that a popular name in a naming convention I.e. 'mercury' resolves to something for you and something for someone at a different firm (mercury.intranet.[firm].not-so-stupid-tld). A cert is possibly not a fully qualified one so when ICANN gives away mercury you need to append .asshat to everything ICANN names. (Two firms have…

Ah, resolver (not DNS) search paths. They were a really bad idea that can and do lead to leaked queries that can result in all sorts of unpleasantness and risks.

As for certs, AFAIK, you can't get a certificate for a non-fqdn from a public CA since 2015.

Re: How did .agakhan, .ismaili and .imamat get their own TLDs?

#64

Post by hsbauauvhabzb »

ahoka wrote: post #26
postquantumfax wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DNS allows search so we really should have started rejecting everything that isn't qualified with an end dot as punishment to ICANN.. Instead random common names might be treated differently on every network to make sure these people can't issue certs that will be trusted for them in your own network, etc. Now prioratizing unambiguos naming would be somewhat acceptable if ICANN was tacobell and just a steward of nami…

Hot take: TLDs should not exist but parking domains should not be allowed.

And cost if domains should increase near exponentially with the more you own. One domain? $10/year, two domains: $50, three: $250, etc.

Re: How did .agakhan, .ismaili and .imamat get their own TLDs?

#65

Post by dc396 »

postquantumfax wrote: post #62
arcfour wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Run your own DNS then, if you're using your own DNS? Why are your queries for internal systems leaking out to the internet?

If icann sells www as a tld domain then your use of www as a machine name you may refer to unqualified is a risk because virtually every piece of software in the world respects public issuance until you delete it all if you can. The DNS naming confusion was largely dealt with by having a small number of TLDs and rarely referring to complex things like partially specified subdomains, but every once in a while a fool n…

You might want to look at the "domain" directive of resolv.conf and the concept of "split horizon DNS".

Re: How did .agakhan, .ismaili and .imamat get their own TLDs?

#66

Post by maxbond »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #53
maxbond wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True but I don't think the distinction matters to the overall point that it's perfectly ordinary for religious institutions to operate a TLD, regardless of the mechanism that allows for it.

Vatican City is a theocracy, not a religion. You'd technically have to add .uk and many more to the list if you're broadening to all nations with a state religion.

It's the central bureaucratic/theocratic function of a major world religion which, it just so happens, is organized as a micronation instead of as a foundation or something like that. The primary function of the UK is not to run the Anglican church, nor is their king generally thought of as their primary leader.

Re: How did .agakhan, .ismaili and .imamat get their own TLDs?

#67

Post by righthand »

Daviey wrote: post #46
827a wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that private entities can monopolize gTLDs, including words that aren't even made-up or reasonably copy-written (e.g. the MAN group in Europe owns .man) was an embarrassing and dishonorable decision by ICANN. I'm all for having tons of weird, awesome gTLDs, and I'm even for brand-specific gTLDs like .google, but the cost these entities should incur by asking for one to be created is: Anyone can use it. 1. A…

What should happen with the proceeds of the sales? Is the highest bidder really the best custodian of a tld? Why have a quota of, as you say, 250 every 10 years? What does this do to help, what issues does it address?

Quotas are sometimes applied to create value of a simple asset aka scarcity (or a bureaucrat tax). Think limited number of taxi medallions or street vendor or liquor licenses. That makes the medallion/license/gtld hold value.

Re: How did .agakhan, .ismaili and .imamat get their own TLDs?

#69

Post by JoshTriplett »

righthand wrote: post #67
Daviey wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What should happen with the proceeds of the sales? Is the highest bidder really the best custodian of a tld? Why have a quota of, as you say, 250 every 10 years? What does this do to help, what issues does it address?

Quotas are sometimes applied to create value of a simple asset aka scarcity (or a bureaucrat tax). Think limited number of taxi medallions or street vendor or liquor licenses. That makes the medallion/license/gtld hold value.

> Think limited number of taxi medallions or street vendor or liquor licenses.

Those are not particularly compelling examples in favor of such a thing.

Re: How did .agakhan, .ismaili and .imamat get their own TLDs?

#70

Post by righthand »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #69
righthand wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quotas are sometimes applied to create value of a simple asset aka scarcity (or a bureaucrat tax). Think limited number of taxi medallions or street vendor or liquor licenses. That makes the medallion/license/gtld hold value.

> Think limited number of taxi medallions or street vendor or liquor licenses. Those are not particularly compelling examples in favor of such a thing.

I’m not making an argument for quotas, just explaining why they usually are included. It’s a cheap way to add “market” value to something aka scarcity.

The issue would occur in the suggested system when ICANN decides to one day stop creating 250 domain names down to 25 domain names or some such change that increases the value of the gtlds to ridiculous numbers only the wealthy/well-connected can afford.

Post reply on HN