4 ms·
Having it as a tld makes it clear, since you could easily have brazil.amazon, bolivia.amazon, peru.amazon, etc. That's more hierarchically correct than amazon.c
by seszett 7y ago
Having it as a tld makes it clear, since you could easily have brazil.amazon, bolivia.amazon, peru.amazon, etc. That's more hierarchically correct than amazon.com.br, amazon.bo, amazon.pe.
For most people though I don't think it makes a difference, as I don't think DNS hierarchy is well understood by most internet users.
- newphonewhodis 7y agoI get what you are saying, however, Brazil(br) "hosts"-has it in- The Amazon; as do the other countries. I would expect a resolver to go to a top level namespace- i.e. a country that has people to run the infrastructure and not a river- and all those places scope out certain features contained with in them. In my mind: .(root server) > (global feature/country/company) > (feature/host) e.g. . > .br > amazon makes more sense than . > amazon > ccTLD. I think a better example for your point would be `.ocean` as the logical way to divided it would be pacific.ocean, atlantic.ocean, etc. however no one entity "owns" the whole or said parts of the ocean and dolphins do not want to administer DNS servers. That said, naming things is hard.