3 ms·

My point here is that both the linked article and your comment propose an ICANN-exclusive solution as the alternative to a Google-exclusive solution. What make

My point here is that both the linked article and your comment propose an ICANN-exclusive solution as the alternative to a Google-exclusive solution. What makes one solution "comparably better" than the other? Is it the fact that ICANN is legally a non profit org, compared to Google?

detaro 10y ago
At least the major TLDs have a track record that you can own a domain name for decades and swap out all the lower-level service providers (registrar, DNS, actual hosting). Those also have an interest in doing a good job since a) I pay them and b) I can swap them out if they don't. Random social media sites don't have that track record, and are less flexible. Some platforms have been quite good at longevity as well, but it is unlikely they are going to beat the domain registration system (on which they also depend), and you don't have the option of just moving your content somewhere else and keep the URLs/reference alive. Yes, domains are not 100% stable either (they can be lost to legal action, or fraud/criminal activity), but at least the same level of risk exist for content on other services. There are interesting attempts at alternatives, but they don't have the reach yet.
uiri 10y ago
I don't view "own your own domain name" as an ICANN-exclusive solution. There are alternative DNS roots. If ICANN's administration of the root DNS servers becomes truly untenable, then it is possible to make a switch and end-users won't even need to know due to recursive DNS resolvers. If your domain is a .com or a .net, you are also relying on VeriSign. If your domain is in a different TLD, then you are relying on that registry. Beyond that, most of the DNS roots are operated by organizations other than ICANN. I think that the long history of the Internet and the Domain Name System lends it additional credibility over that of web services operated by companies like Google.

detaro 10y ago

At least the major TLDs have a track record that you can own a domain name for decades and swap out all the lower-level service providers (registrar, DNS, actual hosting). Those also have an interest in doing a good job since a) I pay them and b) I can swap them out if they don't. Random social media sites don't have that track record, and are less flexible. Some platforms have been quite good at longevity as well, but it is unlikely they are going to beat the domain registration system (on which they also depend), and you don't have the option of just moving your content somewhere else and keep the URLs/reference alive. Yes, domains are not 100% stable either (they can be lost to legal action, or fraud/criminal activity), but at least the same level of risk exist for content on other services. There are interesting attempts at alternatives, but they don't have the reach yet.

uiri 10y ago

I don't view "own your own domain name" as an ICANN-exclusive solution. There are alternative DNS roots. If ICANN's administration of the root DNS servers becomes truly untenable, then it is possible to make a switch and end-users won't even need to know due to recursive DNS resolvers. If your domain is a .com or a .net, you are also relying on VeriSign. If your domain is in a different TLD, then you are relying on that registry. Beyond that, most of the DNS roots are operated by organizations other than ICANN. I think that the long history of the Internet and the Domain Name System lends it additional credibility over that of web services operated by companies like Google.