Hostnames and DNS are not equivalent. Those are not nitpicks. People use alternative name systems. They can be used with existing protocols and URIs. It's expl

Hostnames and DNS are not equivalent. Those are not nitpicks. People use alternative name systems. They can be used with existing protocols and URIs. It's explicitly supported - neither local hosts file nor avahi are DNS. Problem is you need names to use, and you can't really pick non-conflicting ones, if any new gTLDs may be issued by ICANN. There are alternative name systems, mostly using unique alternative TLDs and AFAIK none of them are registered or reserved at ICANN. I presume ICANN doesn't support it, or they want payments as in gTLDs. Payments for protection against future conflicts, not for a service as they do not resolve in DNS. The article may not be clear, but AFAICT *.crypto are in fact resolving domains (among doing other things). When I install support for crypto names on my system, am I supposed to use something like: ping crypto:<domain> ping --crypto <domain> How would an alternate URI scheme help? I agree appropriating .crypto in particular may be a bit presumptuous. At the same time, one might expect .crypto to be administered by crypto, in whatever chaotic way people side with, along with the ensuing brokenness.