4 ms·

Domain names were initially provided free of charge. I once saw an estimate that put the administrative cost of a domain name at less than 20 cents. Then came

by 3xblah 7y ago

Domain names were initially provided free of charge. I once saw an estimate that put the administrative cost of a domain name at less than 20 cents. Then came "NewCo", now known as ICANN, and the "business" of "selling" domain names. Verisign, the operator of .com, arguably the most important TLD, operates the com registry subject to agreements with US Department of Commerce and ICANN. These contracts now let them keep raising prices gradually. It is doubtful that these increases reflect or are in any way proportional increases in administrative costs.

fanf2 7y ago
When ICANN was founded, the DNS was almost entirely monopolized by Network Solutions who sold domains for $100 per year. The process was very manual and time consuming (think old-style TLS certificates). ICANN’s purpose was to break up the monopoly by setting up the two-level registry/registrar system, by creating more TLDs, and by taking away some TLDs. Verisign, through various acquisitions and sell-offs, the descendent of Network Solutions, and still dominates.
- 3xblah 7y ago
  I also remember it was $50/year for a time. A 100% increase/decrease. The fees were/are arbitrary and do not correlate to administrative costs.
- wmf 7y ago
  The transition from InterNIC to Network Solutions was botched, but ICANN was a very complex and still expensive fix for that mistake.
rs23296008n1 7y ago
I figured that domain names were essentially just an excuse for taking rental money (or printing money if you add a bit of poetic license). I understand why the sale price can vary. Stuff has a market price and some are now more valuable. Initial setup for new domain should be negligible however. I also understand there are costs for keeping the lights on but I can't see that rental being much more than a dollar per month. It can't cost THAT much to serve a single name entry. Not when I can get a generic server for $20/month or so. And that is without much effort. With a minimal bit more effort I could probably get something a lot cheaper. The whole pricing structure seems like a scam.

by 3xblah 7y ago

fanf2 7y ago

When ICANN was founded, the DNS was almost entirely monopolized by Network Solutions who sold domains for $100 per year. The process was very manual and time consuming (think old-style TLS certificates). ICANN’s purpose was to break up the monopoly by setting up the two-level registry/registrar system, by creating more TLDs, and by taking away some TLDs. Verisign, through various acquisitions and sell-offs, the descendent of Network Solutions, and still dominates.

3xblah 7y ago
I also remember it was $50/year for a time. A 100% increase/decrease. The fees were/are arbitrary and do not correlate to administrative costs.
wmf 7y ago
The transition from InterNIC to Network Solutions was botched, but ICANN was a very complex and still expensive fix for that mistake.

rs23296008n1 7y ago

I figured that domain names were essentially just an excuse for taking rental money (or printing money if you add a bit of poetic license). I understand why the sale price can vary. Stuff has a market price and some are now more valuable. Initial setup for new domain should be negligible however. I also understand there are costs for keeping the lights on but I can't see that rental being much more than a dollar per month. It can't cost THAT much to serve a single name entry. Not when I can get a generic server for $20/month or so. And that is without much effort. With a minimal bit more effort I could probably get something a lot cheaper. The whole pricing structure seems like a scam.