Mobile Top Level Domain Gets ICANN Nod 198
Sushant Bhatia writes "Despite fierce criticism from Tim Berners-Lee, the father of the Web, ICANN has decided to go ahead and create a new TLD (Top Level Domain) aimed at mobile phones and other mobile devices. Bizarrely the new domain will be '.mobi'. Considering that one of the chief banes of accessing the Internet from a mobile phone is the fact that keying in long Internet addresses takes time, the decision to use .mobi seem odd. A good place to keep up with the ongoings of ICANN is the ICANN Watch which reports that a TLD system has been launched in Turkey as the result of an alliance between the Turkish Informatics Association (TBD) and Unified Identity Technology (UNIDT)."
Get rid of the i. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Get rid of the i. (Score:2)
Re:Get rid of the i. (Score:2)
I'm speaking, in case you hadn't seen it coming, of
(Come on, you HAD to see that coming! That rotten tomato in your hand only confirms it!)
Re:Get rid of the i. (Score:2)
Strange departure (Score:5, Insightful)
Not really. (Score:2)
It's a location, like the country-based TLDs used by the non-US world.
Whether it makes sense to have a mobile-location domain or not is debatable. It certainly isn't necessary, though it may be desirable. Or maybe there's some pressing need I just don't see.
The question is, who is going to acquire the second-tier domains? Will it be mobile carriers, so that you get a hostname when you sign up for your phone/PDA service? That seems most likely.
But why can't they use their existing domain? Maybe w
Wrong (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, all of a sudden, the device you use determines the which domain you
Right. (Score:2)
Saying that
I agree that it's a solution to a problem I don't think exists, or at least it's swatting a fly with dyna
Re:Strange departure (Score:2)
XML/XHTML/CSS etc is supposed to solve this, not allow for the creation of another TLD just for mobile content!
.mobi (Score:2, Funny)
Re:.mobi (Score:2)
Get ready... (Score:3)
Re:Get ready... (Score:3, Funny)
what else?
Ohh, a "flood" of
Got it. that was pretty funny
Re:Get ready... (Score:2, Funny)
Call it .mobi. Some years ago--never mind how long precisely -- having little or no clue in my head, and nothing particular to interest me at the coding keyboard, I thought I would write a few RFCs and see the committee-driven part of the Internet...
[ ...104 Slashdot posts later... ]
"AND I ONLY AM ESCAPED ALONE TO TELL THEE"
- Job.
The meeting is done. Why then here does any new TLD step forth? -- Because one did survive the wreck.
Teh Trick! (Score:4, Funny)
2. Wait until the same story comes up on slashdot (2-3 days)
3.
4. Profit!
Re:Teh Trick! (Score:4, Funny)
6. Repeat.
Re:Teh Trick! (Score:2)
6. Overuse catchphrases
Mobi huh? (Score:3, Interesting)
mobi.us.strip (Score:4, Funny)
Re:mobi.us.strip (Score:2)
Even in the U.S. alone, there seem to be quite a few MOBI trademark registrations. Looks like using this TLD could prove indeed risky. What were they thinking when they decided to use a non-descriptive term?
Re:mobi.us.strip (Score:2)
Even though this requires a tinfoil hat, I wonder... Could it simply be a passive-agressive response to pressure they don't want to endure any longer? Basically giving the T-Mobile types what they want but at the same time hamstringing the implementation such that it dissappears from relevance shortly after introduction. Or perhaps make the TLD so obtuse that the support for it wans and it never gets introduced.
Granted it requir
It doesn't matter... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:It doesn't matter... (Score:2)
Yeah, there is the thing for the web called google that does the same thing.
TLDs have simply gotten to be cash cows for those registrars out there, the sleezier the better!
I mean, who would have thunk that going to http://slashdot.com/ [slashdot.com] would get you to slashdot.org? Heck, I remember when you would introduce slashdot to someone and you tell them to go to slashdot.org and they would type http://ww [slashdot.com]
Not a problem (Score:2)
Was that the point of wap? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Was that the point of wap? (Score:2)
keying in long addresses? (Score:3, Insightful)
This is a domain targeted specifically at phones. So it is reasonable to assume that phone manufacturers will create something that automatically fills in the
Of course, who knows how many of these addresses will really be optimized for phones. It probably won't take long for domain speculators and porn shops to gobble them up.
Re:keying in long addresses? (Score:2)
That sentence left me slightly sick...
.m would be even better (Score:5, Insightful)
[not to mention that "mo" are on the same key in a cellphone, making it even more annoying to key in... but at least predictive text might pick up that you're typing "mobile"]
Re:.m would be even better (Score:2)
You'd think there would be some restriction against 1-letter TLDs, but I can't find anything in the RFCs. I did find RFC 1591 [faqs.org], which says "it is extremely unlikely that any other TLDs will be created", besides the country-code TLDs and the generic TLDs: EDU, COM, ORG, NET, GOV, MIL, and INT. I'd imagine that due to this, there's some code out there that assumes TLDs must be exactly 2 or 3 letters long.
Four-letter top-level domains (INFO and NAME, along with BIZ) have been around since 2001. Other new gTL
Re:.m would be even better (Score:2)
Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Other way around (Score:2)
That's actually a more useful idea, and I believe that there are a couple of proposals for such a thing (except that they'd probably omit the wireless provider and just give your phone a unique URL with a specialized TLD, and no registrar.)
This idea is supposed to be that if you wanted to get google.com specialized for your mobile device, you'd go to google.mobi in
Re:Other way around (Score:2)
All in all, seems like this is what happens when marketers get a hold of things, but on the bright side the domain registers will rake in more cash.
Re:Why? (Score:2)
[my phone number]@[wireless provider].[net or com]
I hate that... it means that not only do I need to know your phone number, but I need to know your cell carrier as well. It also quashes half the point of number portability -- you can take your number with you, but your email address still changes. To make matters worse, number portability means I can't determine your carrier from your number's exchange anymore. What are the odds that the carriers would get together and make a [phone number]@common-s
Re:Why? (Score:2)
OK, so... (Score:5, Interesting)
All of which entail nothing more than some extra sections on your existing web server, ICANN would have you have to register a second domain, and either run virtual web services on your server or run multiple servers.
Yes, that makes sense.
Re:OK, so... (Score:2, Insightful)
I expect
Re:OK, so... (Score:2)
But
Re:OK, so... (Score:2)
May not make a lot of sense, but it sure makes them more money.
They should have used... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:They should have used... (Score:2, Funny)
Why make this a TLD? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why should this be a top level domain? It seems like "mobi.slashdot.org" would work just as well as "www.slashdot.mobi", with the added advantages to Website operators of not having to maintain a separate domain, and to users of knowing for sure that the former is actually affiliated with the "slashdot.org" domain (less fake sites, phishing, etc.). So what are the advantages of the TLD approach that caused this to get approved?
Re:Why make this a TLD? (Score:2, Insightful)
More money for ICANN.
Re:Why make this a TLD? (Score:2)
See, your problem is that you are a perfectly rational, nice-guy engineer type who has an interest in building good systems. From your standpoint, it makes exactly no sense -- it's actually a bad idea, if anything, which is why you can expect Berners-Lee to oppose it.
The thing is that the registrars (and the ever-evil Verisign, which has taken abuse of power to a fine art) have too godamn much influence at ICANN, and every t
What?! (Score:2, Insightful)
The New Deal: A TLD in every pot! (Score:2)
I guess now if you want to protect your trademark, you have to buy dozens of TLDs today and perhaps hundreds tomorrow if ICANN continues its goofy trend.
Re:The New Deal: A TLD in every pot! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The New Deal: A TLD in every pot! (Score:2)
Joe public doesn't remember the TLD anyway. They try
TLDs are a bad idea.
Why would having slashdot.com and slashdot.org going to different sites EVER be a good thing?!
Re:The New Deal: A TLD in every pot! (Score:2)
It was broken from the day it was defined with the highest level at the right (the UK has used a more logical left-to-right system for some time but in the end it was converted to the right-to-left system crafted by the Americans).
But the general public does not understand it. Now that the Internet is for the general public, the domain names should be restructured to what the general public expects. i.e.:
- a flat system, upon which structure can be added as the
Re:The New Deal: A TLD in every pot! (Score:2)
Because our 13 root servers would then need to store every domain name in existance (NS and A records). It entirely defeats the purpose of a hierarchical database, which the Domain Name System is.
Re:The New Deal: A TLD in every pot! (Score:2)
Servers for
Re:The New Deal: A TLD in every pot! (Score:2)
Re:The New Deal: A TLD in every pot! (Score:2)
For future growth, the hierarchical model makes sense. As asia and europe grow in the internet market, ccTLDs (like .cn, or the IDN equivalents) will grow.
Granted, semantically, the gTLDs have no use, but
Re:The New Deal: A TLD in every pot! (Score:2)
Now they have to know everything, not just where to send
Re:The New Deal: A TLD in every pot! (Score:2)
I talked in detail about this in a previous slashdot discussion [slashdot.org] about the similarly abominable
Re:The New Deal: A TLD in every pot! (Score:2)
Currently TLD's are already fairly useless for that purpose. Try "whois mcdonalds.org". The fight over "sex" would be no worse than the fight over "sex.com" that already happened.
I do agree with your previous assertion that country codes are useful,
Ramblings (Score:4, Interesting)
Also, what I find much more important than the TLD, when are mobiles going to be truely usable as web clients? With PDAs, the usability is pretty good, and properly built websites run on them without a problem. But with mobile phones, access is problematic. Most don't support XHTML, which means pages must be made in the WML format, which is just a complete abomination. It does away with all the meaningful structure of HTML, allegedly to make things simpler, and then adds a whole lot of complexity with its scripting language. And then most phone's HTTP implementations is horribly flaky - fragmenting the headers will cause many phones to not render the page.
Multiple Function buttons (Score:2, Informative)
Wait till the Moby lawsuit for typosquatting (Score:2)
Re:Wait till the Moby lawsuit for typosquatting (Score:2)
Time to do away with centralized TLDs and the whole TLD hierarchial system. Its not like its necessary from a technical point of view.
Commercialization is to blame (Score:2)
Well this all because of stupidity and the commercialization of the Internet. TLDs had a purpose but that purpose now has been shifted into one thing. Create anther so people will register their name again.
Stupid courts/and others are to blame for letting companies/groups think they have to have their name in each TLD even though that TL
Stop complaining - start fighting (Score:3, Funny)
Tims Berners-Lee complains about this... Tims Berners-Lee complains about that... For the father of the web, this guy does an awful lot of complaining about it.
Sometimes, the father needs to take his child down. I think he needs to take more extreme actions. Like domain terrorism, or something.
oh dear god , my resistance is futile (Score:2)
The
So Bass Ackwards!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
Alternative Registrations (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Alternative Registrations (Score:2)
Why is TBL mad? (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay, so: What's wrong with that?
These are mnemonics, not currencies.
Their intent was never to be a currency. Just mnemonics.
If you are buying up names because you think they'll be valuable later on, you're doing something dumb. The names system doesn't owe you anything. You aren't owed a profit on names.
Let the names be plentiful.
Re:Why is TBL mad? (Score:2)
Yay.
Re:Why is TBL mad? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why is TBL mad? (Score:2)
"Value": the quality (positive or negative) that renders something desirable or valuable
doohickey.net is going to be less easily found if there's ten other TLDs than if there are only two.
A plug for my company here (Score:3, Insightful)
The device detection problem is a big one. Tim is right on this. URLs are how we identify sites that we want to go to, not how we identify content. There should be one URL for all content types and the site should do the right thing for the device.
That's a complicated problem. There are about 1,000 different mobile devices currently in use. Keeping track of them, and the different types of content they need, is tough.
Most devices can handle one of four different types of content:
Creating another domain shifts more work to users (in the form of marketing the other URL, remembering it, using it). Users shouldn't have to do work. Tools should do work.
Anyway, if Slashdot ever wants to get a license to our software to have a mobile Slashdot you can read on the phone, contact us: info@chiralsoftware.net.
.mobi (Score:2)
TBL is right (Score:2)
Why this is a bad thing (Score:2, Insightful)
Tim Berners-Lee talked about it [w3.org] over a year ago, and many other people have covered the reasons why it's bad.
The main reason being that creating top level domain names for specific devices is dumb. Cell phones / mobile devices may be hot shit right now, but what happens in 10 years when every device we own had access to the web... will we get a
User agents have content negotiation and identify themselves for a reason. that
How about not using top-level domains at all? (Score:2)
I think a more productive thing might be for we to get rid of top-level domain names altogether and to allow spaces in names, so that we could go to websites by typing things like:
google
yaho
Re:How about not using top-level domains at all? (Score:2)
m.yahoo
and
mobile.yahoo
should really be
yahoo.m
yahoo.mobile
Re:How about not using top-level domains at all? (Score:2)
Let the voting begin!
Why?
This is the middleman grubbing for more money (Score:2)
This domain was created for money only (Score:2)
Look, all phones would soon read normal html like any other web-browser (e.g. look at Opera's reader for mobile phones).
There's absolutely NO REASON why this mobile-domain should be created.
TELECOM! WE WON'T BUY ANY MOBILES THAT ARE LIMITED TO
hotkeys? (Score:2)
Shortify Mobile (Score:2)
More importantly, you can access Shortify by typing the address out using the numbers on your phone.
From a PC:
http://shortify.com/ [shortify.com]
From a Phone:
http://74678439.com/ [74678439.com]
(SHORTIFY on the number pad)
Examples:
http://74678439.com/1187 [74678439.com]
(Yahoo! Mobile)
http://74678439.com/1188 [74678439.com]
(Slashdot Mobile)
It's not an ideal solution, but it's considerably easier than typing out the full U
Learning disability (Score:2)
Now they do more of the same, as if it would make a difference, which it won't. But it's a typical sign of an institution going downhill if it can't adapt anymore and doesn't learn from past mistakes.
My bet: Five years from now, ICANN will be either gone, or so unimportant that it could just as well go away because nobody would notice anyways.
Re:Why .mobi? [OT] (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Why .mobi? [OT] (Score:2)
Re:Why .mobi? [OT] (Score:2)
Do away with the TLDs and all this nonsense like cybersquatting would stop (I prefer a BLT myself, anyway :-)
Re:Why .mobi? [OT] (Score:2)
Re:Too long... (Score:2)
Re:More TLDs to come (Score:2)
Actually, the ??? isn't that hard to figure out.
1. Make new top level domains.
2. Watch as every major company spends money to register the domain the new TLD, trying to beat out the squatters from spending the money to register the domain.
3. Profit.
When the TLDs were first out, it make a lot of sense. If the intent of the domain was commercial, you got a
Re:More TLDs to come (Score:2)
Revise the joke to be:
1. Make new TLDs
3.
Thank you for your participation.
Re:From the Berners-Lee interview (Score:2)
Re:From the Berners-Lee interview (Score:2)
Re:How about just using numbers? (Score:2)
Re:How about just using numbers? (Score:2)
Re:Was something wrong with .MP? (Score:2, Informative)
Yes, that's a ccTLD, not a gTLD.
All you people in Northern Mariana Islands, Tonga, Western Samoa etc... can kiss my ass you money grabbers!
Re:Was something wrong with .MP? (Score:2)
they could take one cheek each.
Re:Was something wrong with .MP? (Score:2)
Ah, but you can advance over words and partial words. I find that most URLs can be input faster using T9 if you look for the embedded words as you're entering them.
Re:A certain techno artist is soon to resurface... (Score:2)
Re:A certain techno artist is soon to resurface... (Score:2)
It's a cover of a song by the excellent band Mission of Burma. Remember that song Academy Fight Song? The one REM covered? That's theirs too.
Re:Oh come on now.... (Score:2)