4 ms·

If you've any developers on your team that use MacOS, avoid .local since it does some listening on this for Bonjour: https://blog.scottlowe.org/2006/01/04/mac-o

If you've any developers on your team that use MacOS, avoid .local since it does some listening on this for Bonjour: https://blog.scottlowe.org/2006/01/04/mac-os-x-and-local-domains/ https://blog.scottlowe.org/2006/01/04/mac-os-x-and-local-dom... I believe .localhost is the "official" recommended TLD for local development.

Spivak 8y ago
Way more things than MacOS use mDNS for service discovery. That TLD is reserved for that use.
cpburns2009 8y ago
According to RFC 2602 [1], > The ".localhost" TLD has traditionally been statically defined in host DNS implementations as having an A record pointing to the loop back IP address and is reserved for such use. Any other use would conflict with widely deployed code which assumes this use. So it might work but it could be problematic if the intent is to use ".localhost" as a local network domain rather than just the local host. [1]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606
- ameliaquining 8y ago
  .test, .example, and .invalid are also reserved by the RFC and don't have this problem.
  - cpburns2009 8y ago
    > ".test" is recommended for use in testing of current or new DNS related code. This one looks the safest and least prone to confusion. > ".example" is recommended for use in documentation or as examples. > ".invalid" is intended for use in online construction of domain names that are sure to be invalid and which it is obvious at a glance are invalid. Both of these look problematic from a terminology standpoint, not a technical one.
    - Spivak 8y ago
      Plus "DNS related code" can be stretched pretty far to "code that uses DNS." so it's the one I prefer. The only thing I wish was easier was having a TLD for network local names but not link-local names. I typically just buy a name for that but it seems clunky since any in-use name that uses public DNS TLDs I feel ought to be DNS server independent.
    - ekimekim 8y ago
      .test is also problematic for the purpose of hosting internal (but not development/testing) domains on a private network. There is a draft RFC to reserve .internal for this purpose, which I think makes a lot of sense. https://github.com/wkumari/draft-wkumari-dnsop-internal https://github.com/wkumari/draft-wkumari-dnsop-internal
      - takeda 8y ago
        .lan would be much better name.
        ekimekim 8y ago
        An internal network might not be a LAN - for example, it might be a company's entire internal infrastructure spread over three offices and a datacenter with VPN.

Spivak 8y ago

Way more things than MacOS use mDNS for service discovery. That TLD is reserved for that use.

cpburns2009 8y ago

According to RFC 2602 [1], > The ".localhost" TLD has traditionally been statically defined in host DNS implementations as having an A record pointing to the loop back IP address and is reserved for such use. Any other use would conflict with widely deployed code which assumes this use. So it might work but it could be problematic if the intent is to use ".localhost" as a local network domain rather than just the local host. [1]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606

ameliaquining 8y ago
.test, .example, and .invalid are also reserved by the RFC and don't have this problem.
- cpburns2009 8y ago
  > ".test" is recommended for use in testing of current or new DNS related code. This one looks the safest and least prone to confusion. > ".example" is recommended for use in documentation or as examples. > ".invalid" is intended for use in online construction of domain names that are sure to be invalid and which it is obvious at a glance are invalid. Both of these look problematic from a terminology standpoint, not a technical one.
  - Spivak 8y ago
    Plus "DNS related code" can be stretched pretty far to "code that uses DNS." so it's the one I prefer. The only thing I wish was easier was having a TLD for network local names but not link-local names. I typically just buy a name for that but it seems clunky since any in-use name that uses public DNS TLDs I feel ought to be DNS server independent.
  - ekimekim 8y ago
    .test is also problematic for the purpose of hosting internal (but not development/testing) domains on a private network. There is a draft RFC to reserve .internal for this purpose, which I think makes a lot of sense. https://github.com/wkumari/draft-wkumari-dnsop-internal https://github.com/wkumari/draft-wkumari-dnsop-internal
    - takeda 8y ago
      .lan would be much better name.
      - ekimekim 8y ago
        An internal network might not be a LAN - for example, it might be a company's entire internal infrastructure spread over three offices and a datacenter with VPN.