7 ms·

This is going to turn out to have been a huge mistake once the actual .crypto is added as a real TLD to root DNS come ICANN's round 2 expansion of new gTLDs.

Wilya 7y ago
Yeah. After the .dev disaster, you'd think people would have learned their lesson...
- mercer 7y ago
  I have a .dev domain and completely missed this. What happened?
  - efdee 7y ago
    Many people were using the .dev tld as some sort of local tld.
    - beefhash 7y ago
      And I guess it was probably cheaper for Google to just buy the TLD and not fix their internal processes?
      - untog 7y ago
        Well I think buying it was also to the benefit of everyone else using .dev locally. But oh well.
        efdee 7y ago
        Not really. Suddenly, .dev is a real TLD instead of a fictional one we use for local hostnames.
  - OskarS 7y ago
    Google owns the .dev TLD, and they bought it for entirely internal use. People got upset about this (any company owning a TLD for internal use only is pretty weird, and especially one as generic as ".dev") so they started to offer it to the public. The bigger issue is that a lot of people use .dev for internal/development uses, and it should therefore never been made into a "real" TLD in the first place. It's like deciding to sell "example.com" to someone.
    - mercer 7y ago
      I registered a .dev for my company, but because it's a company of one I imagine this won't affect me then. Good to know though. I do recall using .dev for local/internal development years ago... EDIT: so would this mean that registering a .dev for some BigCo domain could potentially cause problems? Curious what the real-world implications might be.
      - eugeniub 7y ago
        I don’t think there are really any implications moving forward. It only affected developers in the first place. Developers have since been forced to stop using .dev for development, thanks to the existence actual .dev domains.
      - OskarS 7y ago
        Yeah, at this point the horse is out of the barn, so don't worry about registering a .dev. Any damage that would be done has already happened. The point is it shouldn't have happened in the first place.
    - toxican 7y ago
      If anyone's curious, there's a shortlist of "official" TLDs to use for local development https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606#section-2 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606#section-2 I could've swore .local was okay, as that's what I use. But maybe not. Apparently it can cause issues with Macs, but that's new to me seeing as how I primarily develop on one.
  - judge2020 7y ago
    Developers have been using <something>.dev as their localhost hostname even though the .dev TLD wasn't a designated test/reserved TLD[0]. Everyone's non-https development environments broke when Google added the TLD to HSTS preload, forcing browsers to load it in HTTPS. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15268701 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15268701 0: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606#section-2 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606#section-2
- diggan 7y ago
  I think ICANN will continue with more disasters, you just wait :)
dmurray 7y ago
If it has enough adoption, hopefully ICANN would reserve it for Opera or Unstoppable Domains, in the same way they wouldn't sell me .coke or .google.
- contravariant 7y ago
  Why on earth didn't they try to use a TLD for it though? Why would you use a feature of the protocol you're trying to replace? It would have made much more sense to define a new URI scheme.
  - CydeWeys 7y ago
    A new URI would have made a lot more sense. This current plan, intentionally causing collisions with actual real DNS, is a disaster in the making. .crypto is one of the most desired and anticipated strings for the next round of gTLD expansion, and ICANN is not gonna forego the revenue from that auction. This is all a guaranteed disaster in the making.
    - labawi 7y ago
      Did you mean a new scheme? AFAIK both http, https, and ftp, ssh, rtp, whatever protocols refer to names in their URIs. Names, which may be resolved by different, configurable methods, a few of which are popular, DNS among them, but also hosts files, avahi, netbios, maybe others. There are usually at least 2 of them active. ICANN is a corrupt organization that has usurped the power to delegate all names, relegating all of them¹ to their² DNS system where, ever since gTLDs, they may be expected lend just about any name. In effect, you are expected not to use a hostname, even on a local network, without paying tribute. IMO, ICANN needs to be put down, or put to its place, as they do not have a natural right to all hostnames. If they wish to remain an authority on hostnames, they should reserve names for other uses besides DNS. And stop with the gTLDs - it they give out all interesting TLDs, then there can't be non-colliding alternatives. IMO, if they collide, both are to blame, but ICANN more so than Opera, as they apparently reserve 0 viable host name hierarchies for uses other than DNS. Please correct me if I'm wrong, some details may be incorrect. ¹ AFAIK exceptions are reserved TLDs: test, example, invalid and localhost. Not really a place for an alternate name system. ² AFAIK there used to be alternative DNS roots.
drcode 7y ago
Are we supposed to care that ICANN's feelings are hurt? Hopefully this is a step to replacing ICANN with something better. If you think ICANN is some sort of magical organization that should get to decide all TLDs, just vote with your feet and don't use Opera.
- CydeWeys 7y ago
  ICANN's feelings are irrelevant here. The point is that they control the DNS root servers and no one else does, so anyone claiming to operate a TLD that isn't actually in the root servers is gonna have a bad time. Think of what a disaster this is going to be if .crypto is launched for real in a few years. Opera is likely going to go with the real .crypto in the root DNS, thus dumping all these blockchain ones, but even if they don't, there's the problem that now .crypto domains will resolve differently in Opera than in all other browsers. That is a security/usability nightmare. > If you think ICANN is some sort of magical organization that should get to decide all TLDs There's nothing magical about ICANN whatsoever, and the normative claim you're making here is irrelevant. They are the organization that decides TLDs, period, and pretending that they aren't when the other 99.999% of users and devices on the Internet do use root DNS and root DNS only is a recipe for disaster.
  - konschubert 7y ago
    The ICANN .crypto might simply not get launched or fail after launch if the name is already taken.
    - CydeWeys 7y ago
      If they haven't delegated it yet then it's by definition not yet taken as far as they're concerned, and they're the ones that make these decisions. Let me put it in different terms: ICANN currently has a monopoly on the issuance of new TLDs that has so far banked hundreds of millions of dollars for them. There's no way in hell they're going to voluntarily give up this monopoly and just let any random people start a new TLD without going through them.
- 7y ago

Wilya 7y ago

Yeah. After the .dev disaster, you'd think people would have learned their lesson...

mercer 7y ago
I have a .dev domain and completely missed this. What happened?
- efdee 7y ago
  Many people were using the .dev tld as some sort of local tld.
  - beefhash 7y ago
    And I guess it was probably cheaper for Google to just buy the TLD and not fix their internal processes?
    - untog 7y ago
      Well I think buying it was also to the benefit of everyone else using .dev locally. But oh well.
      - efdee 7y ago
        Not really. Suddenly, .dev is a real TLD instead of a fictional one we use for local hostnames.
- OskarS 7y ago
  Google owns the .dev TLD, and they bought it for entirely internal use. People got upset about this (any company owning a TLD for internal use only is pretty weird, and especially one as generic as ".dev") so they started to offer it to the public. The bigger issue is that a lot of people use .dev for internal/development uses, and it should therefore never been made into a "real" TLD in the first place. It's like deciding to sell "example.com" to someone.
  - mercer 7y ago
    I registered a .dev for my company, but because it's a company of one I imagine this won't affect me then. Good to know though. I do recall using .dev for local/internal development years ago... EDIT: so would this mean that registering a .dev for some BigCo domain could potentially cause problems? Curious what the real-world implications might be.
    - eugeniub 7y ago
      I don’t think there are really any implications moving forward. It only affected developers in the first place. Developers have since been forced to stop using .dev for development, thanks to the existence actual .dev domains.
    - OskarS 7y ago
      Yeah, at this point the horse is out of the barn, so don't worry about registering a .dev. Any damage that would be done has already happened. The point is it shouldn't have happened in the first place.
  - toxican 7y ago
    If anyone's curious, there's a shortlist of "official" TLDs to use for local development https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606#section-2 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606#section-2 I could've swore .local was okay, as that's what I use. But maybe not. Apparently it can cause issues with Macs, but that's new to me seeing as how I primarily develop on one.
- judge2020 7y ago
  Developers have been using <something>.dev as their localhost hostname even though the .dev TLD wasn't a designated test/reserved TLD[0]. Everyone's non-https development environments broke when Google added the TLD to HSTS preload, forcing browsers to load it in HTTPS. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15268701 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15268701 0: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606#section-2 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606#section-2
diggan 7y ago
I think ICANN will continue with more disasters, you just wait :)

dmurray 7y ago

If it has enough adoption, hopefully ICANN would reserve it for Opera or Unstoppable Domains, in the same way they wouldn't sell me .coke or .google.

contravariant 7y ago
Why on earth didn't they try to use a TLD for it though? Why would you use a feature of the protocol you're trying to replace? It would have made much more sense to define a new URI scheme.
- CydeWeys 7y ago
  A new URI would have made a lot more sense. This current plan, intentionally causing collisions with actual real DNS, is a disaster in the making. .crypto is one of the most desired and anticipated strings for the next round of gTLD expansion, and ICANN is not gonna forego the revenue from that auction. This is all a guaranteed disaster in the making.
  - labawi 7y ago
    Did you mean a new scheme? AFAIK both http, https, and ftp, ssh, rtp, whatever protocols refer to names in their URIs. Names, which may be resolved by different, configurable methods, a few of which are popular, DNS among them, but also hosts files, avahi, netbios, maybe others. There are usually at least 2 of them active. ICANN is a corrupt organization that has usurped the power to delegate all names, relegating all of them¹ to their² DNS system where, ever since gTLDs, they may be expected lend just about any name. In effect, you are expected not to use a hostname, even on a local network, without paying tribute. IMO, ICANN needs to be put down, or put to its place, as they do not have a natural right to all hostnames. If they wish to remain an authority on hostnames, they should reserve names for other uses besides DNS. And stop with the gTLDs - it they give out all interesting TLDs, then there can't be non-colliding alternatives. IMO, if they collide, both are to blame, but ICANN more so than Opera, as they apparently reserve 0 viable host name hierarchies for uses other than DNS. Please correct me if I'm wrong, some details may be incorrect. ¹ AFAIK exceptions are reserved TLDs: test, example, invalid and localhost. Not really a place for an alternate name system. ² AFAIK there used to be alternative DNS roots.

drcode 7y ago

Are we supposed to care that ICANN's feelings are hurt? Hopefully this is a step to replacing ICANN with something better. If you think ICANN is some sort of magical organization that should get to decide all TLDs, just vote with your feet and don't use Opera.

CydeWeys 7y ago
ICANN's feelings are irrelevant here. The point is that they control the DNS root servers and no one else does, so anyone claiming to operate a TLD that isn't actually in the root servers is gonna have a bad time. Think of what a disaster this is going to be if .crypto is launched for real in a few years. Opera is likely going to go with the real .crypto in the root DNS, thus dumping all these blockchain ones, but even if they don't, there's the problem that now .crypto domains will resolve differently in Opera than in all other browsers. That is a security/usability nightmare. > If you think ICANN is some sort of magical organization that should get to decide all TLDs There's nothing magical about ICANN whatsoever, and the normative claim you're making here is irrelevant. They are the organization that decides TLDs, period, and pretending that they aren't when the other 99.999% of users and devices on the Internet do use root DNS and root DNS only is a recipe for disaster.
- konschubert 7y ago
  The ICANN .crypto might simply not get launched or fail after launch if the name is already taken.
  - CydeWeys 7y ago
    If they haven't delegated it yet then it's by definition not yet taken as far as they're concerned, and they're the ones that make these decisions. Let me put it in different terms: ICANN currently has a monopoly on the issuance of new TLDs that has so far banked hundreds of millions of dollars for them. There's no way in hell they're going to voluntarily give up this monopoly and just let any random people start a new TLD without going through them.
7y ago