Two New TLD's Near Approval 329
Iphtashu Fitz writes "The Associated Press is reporting that ICANN is nearing approval of two new top level domains: .travel and .post. The Universal Postal Union in Bern, Switzerland, wants ".post" for national postal services, local post offices, business partners and stamp collectors around the world. Private companies that provide postal services, such as Federal Express and UPS, also would be eligible. The Travel Partnership Corp., a New York-based trade group, seeks ".travel" for travel agents, airlines, bed and breakfast operators, tourism bureaus and others in the travel industry. ICANN is also considering eight other TLD's including .asia, .eu, and .jobs but they haven't progressed as far as .travel and .post. More information here."
Nonsense (Score:2, Interesting)
Do post offices need their own TLD?
Come on!
You can tell who's the driving force behind todays Internet standards
.mov TLD for movies (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Only on /. way OT, but... (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, I must be new here...
Get an account, people rarely comment to the Anonymous Coward.
I personally believe that there should be a delay between when an article is posted and when ppl can start flooding posts. What I see is that there are about 10 or so threads at the top of each post. garcia is usually the first or second
And then there are many small threads below the "hot" ones.
Maybe we need a checkbox when submitting a post "Yes, I RTFA" or "No, I didn't RTFA", and a comment modifyer for those (not) reading the articles, and a mod -1 didn't RTFA because the content is obviously there.
Just my thoughts.
And what does this have to do with ICANN's job? (Score:5, Interesting)
One has to have a really crazed imagination or warped sense of humor to believe that ICANN's criteria for selecting new Top Level Domains has anything whatsoever to do with technology or the ability of the net to deliver packets or respond quickly and accurately to DNS queries.
ICANN has become little more than a mouthpiece for certain well healed industrial segments; the public interest, as well as the public itself, has been ejected from ICANN's policymaking and policies.
ICANN is fighting to keep its job from going to the ITU. ICANN's arguments are pretty weak when one considers that ICANN is not doing the job that it was constructed to do but is instead simply the willing handmaiden of small, short-sighted, self-interested groups.
Re:Wow, they did it (Score:5, Interesting)
insightful.post
interesting.post
funny.post
flamebait.post
and so on.
Re:seriously. (Score:1, Interesting)
Yes, the truth can be complex...
Re:Value of non .com/net/org/national TLDs? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Seconded (Score:3, Interesting)
The
I havn't seen a false positive yet.
TLDs Considered Harmful (Score:3, Interesting)
So, if TLDs are not being respected, why have them at all? Some have tried me that it organizes the namespace hierarchically, thus distributing the load. I don't think it helps a lot, if most people go for the
My proposal? Change the system so that top level domains can be directly registered. E.g. Google would get just Google, with no
And one more pet peeve of mine: we could add support for IP-IP encapsulation [faqs.org]. That way, if your server is hosted between a NAT box, you can just instruct clients to route the packet to your internal IP via the NAT box. Of course, the client and the NAT box would have to support it as well...
Re:Right. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:TLDs are BS (Score:4, Interesting)
Regarding TLDs, I think the distinction you may be groping for is that between a naming authority and a subject area.
Countries are quite good at being authorities, but non-governmental authorities are possible too. ICANN comes to mind, and it's possible to imagine the UN, ISO etc. in this role, as well as new amateur and commercial groups yet to be identified.
The bottom line is that the world will never agree which site http://www.kitchenappliances should resolve to, let alone www.truth or www.beauty.
The solution is not more divisions by subject but more groups making the subjective divisions.
Re:This is bullpucky. (Score:2, Interesting)
They can if they want but they don't have to. There's no reason why a
For most organizations dealing in multiple countries, the cost of a website per country is insignificant compared to the other regulatory (and likely marketing) costs per country. For others such as wikipedia, if that would be dificult then pick one country and register a domain there. What's the problem?
The internet is supposed to be free
Who supposes it to be free? If by 'free' they mean unregulated or beyond the reach of giovernments then their supposition is wrong.
Re:TLDs are BS (Score:3, Interesting)
It's nice to be able to print "mybusiness.com" on something and have people know it's a website. "http://www.mybusiness.com" CAN look ok, but for a lot of things, design-wise, it's nicer to drop the 'technical' stuff.
It's also easier to tell people things.. the "dot com" tells them it's a website. As an example, "Look us up, mybusiness dot com" vs "Look us up, AOL keyword mybusiness". (or "web address")
Re:Wow, they did it (Score:3, Interesting)
They already do that (Score:3, Interesting)
Everyone is too used to doing it the old way, though, so I doubt it would ever happen.
More silliness (Score:2, Interesting)
List of TLDs... (Score:3, Interesting)
- Currently active TLDs (be it cc, g, s or otherwise)
- Deprecated TLDs
- Proposed TLDs
?
I've got one myself ( http://www.pointzero.nl/dump/domains.xml - don't complain about non-validation, it's only for quick data-reading ), which I already see I need to edit some ( thanks, wikipedia ) - but can't quite seem to find any other comprehensive list in existance to bring it up to current affairs.
Oh, and any blatant errors in the xml's data ? Feel free to point them out
Re:Wow, they did it (Score:3, Interesting)
When I heard of .info and .biz, in fact way back when I first heard of .cc, I wondered why the extension was "fixed" and why they didn't just open it up to any random string being able to be mapped?
The answer, as far as I understand it, is the almighty dollar. They'll make a ton more money slowly releasing new TLDs than they would if they let anyone take whatever string they wanted as their domain name. Like, "mcdonalds" could be a domain, mapping to 164.109.145.147; or "me.and.my.shadow" could map to 99.99.99.99; etc.
I know I probably just violated some RFCs up above, but why such a big honking deal?