3 ms·

If the point of the domain name for you is marketing, then get one you think is "memorable" and use it as a CNAME. The point for me would be non-marketing uses

by x3blah 6y ago

If the point of the domain name for you is marketing, then get one you think is "memorable" and use it as a CNAME. The point for me would be non-marketing uses, e.g., to get an SSL cert so I do not have to use a self-signed one when monitoring encrypted egress traffic from the local network. That name does not need to be memorable. I can get a free cert from Let's Encrypt but I cannot get free domain name. Best I can get for free is a subdomain of someone else's domain name. As you know, not every domain name is used for the purposes of email addresses or a website. To use a common example, AWS Cloudfront subdomains are not memorable but they are useful to AWS. Like subdomains, domain names can still be useful without being memorable.

gbear605 6y ago
A lot of low-importance tlds offer domain names for $0.99/year. At that rate, I think almost anyone can afford it.
- tasuki 6y ago
  What are some examples of such tlds?
  - gbear605 6y ago
    Hmm, it turns out that I’m actually wrong. I’d see domain registrars offer really cheap domains before, but they’re actually one or two year offers that then bump up to $10/year or $20/year. We need a tld that offers domains for really cheap with the understanding that it’s mainly for people owning shdkshfkskfjslfjsk.sometldname.
    - lokedhs 6y ago
      I'm checking Gandi.net, and .site, .website and .space seems to be around 1 USD per year. They are marketing it as 95% off, but that doesn't change the fact that it's that price.
oarsinsync 6y ago
> If the point of the domain name for you is marketing, then get one you think is "memorable" and use it as a CNAME. The point for me would be non-marketing uses This is a very fair and valid point. Thank you for pointing this out. > to get an SSL cert so I do not have to use a self-signed one when monitoring encrypted egress traffic from the local network This sounds like you're doing proxying / TLS interception / MITM? If so, you need a signing certificate with authority to sign for any arbitrary name. No vendor provides this for free, and using your own self generated CA is the solution here. > Best I can get for free is a subdomain of someone else's domain name. It's unclear what you mean here, as the words you're using are somewhat overloaded, depending on context. An arbitrary gTLD is not something you can get for free, until we have a better solution for DNS than the current approach. Anything else is just variations on a subdomain. Heck, technically even a gTLD is a subdomain of the root domain '.', where you don't own anything there either, and are simply getting a subdomain granted to you by the roots. When you look at it from that perspective, and you're simply looking for something that is unique for you, what's the difference between a subdomain from a dyndns provider, and a subdomain from a registry?
- x3blah 6y ago
  "An arbitrary gTLD is not something you can get from free, until we have a better solution for DNS that the current appraoch." This implies that there is a better approach. I agree. There are many possibilities. I have been running own root zone at home for several decades. I routinely experiment with different ideas. I am aware of many possibilities. I do generate a CA pem file using openssl in order to view own traffic. However even with all these hoops we jump through to do such basic things, "Big Tech" seems to actively try to discourage users even more, .e.g., from monitoring their own traffic. For example, subjecting the user to a keylogger in Chrome and forcing them to type some undocumented, opinionated shibboleth such as "badidea" or "thisisunsafe" to proceed. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/35274659/does-using-badidea-or-thisisunsafe-to-bypass-a-chrome-certificate-hsts-error https://stackoverflow.com/questions/35274659/does-using-badi... The subject of the OP is what was originally supposed to be a "non-commercial" TLD, which since abandoned that designation and began charging fees, and, more importantly, the current and future lack of any restrictions on raising those fees. If one is using a TLD in ways that demand transparency, e.g., to represent an entity that is taking money from the public, then involving a third party that accepts personally identifiable information, e.g., a registrar, makes some sense. However, interactions with the public, e.g., commercial uses, are not the only ways the internet can be used and such uses are not the only way domains can be used.

by x3blah 6y ago

gbear605 6y ago

A lot of low-importance tlds offer domain names for $0.99/year. At that rate, I think almost anyone can afford it.

tasuki 6y ago
What are some examples of such tlds?
- gbear605 6y ago
  Hmm, it turns out that I’m actually wrong. I’d see domain registrars offer really cheap domains before, but they’re actually one or two year offers that then bump up to $10/year or $20/year. We need a tld that offers domains for really cheap with the understanding that it’s mainly for people owning shdkshfkskfjslfjsk.sometldname.
  - lokedhs 6y ago
    I'm checking Gandi.net, and .site, .website and .space seems to be around 1 USD per year. They are marketing it as 95% off, but that doesn't change the fact that it's that price.

oarsinsync 6y ago

> If the point of the domain name for you is marketing, then get one you think is "memorable" and use it as a CNAME. The point for me would be non-marketing uses This is a very fair and valid point. Thank you for pointing this out. > to get an SSL cert so I do not have to use a self-signed one when monitoring encrypted egress traffic from the local network This sounds like you're doing proxying / TLS interception / MITM? If so, you need a signing certificate with authority to sign for any arbitrary name. No vendor provides this for free, and using your own self generated CA is the solution here. > Best I can get for free is a subdomain of someone else's domain name. It's unclear what you mean here, as the words you're using are somewhat overloaded, depending on context. An arbitrary gTLD is not something you can get for free, until we have a better solution for DNS than the current approach. Anything else is just variations on a subdomain. Heck, technically even a gTLD is a subdomain of the root domain '.', where you don't own anything there either, and are simply getting a subdomain granted to you by the roots. When you look at it from that perspective, and you're simply looking for something that is unique for you, what's the difference between a subdomain from a dyndns provider, and a subdomain from a registry?

x3blah 6y ago
"An arbitrary gTLD is not something you can get from free, until we have a better solution for DNS that the current appraoch." This implies that there is a better approach. I agree. There are many possibilities. I have been running own root zone at home for several decades. I routinely experiment with different ideas. I am aware of many possibilities. I do generate a CA pem file using openssl in order to view own traffic. However even with all these hoops we jump through to do such basic things, "Big Tech" seems to actively try to discourage users even more, .e.g., from monitoring their own traffic. For example, subjecting the user to a keylogger in Chrome and forcing them to type some undocumented, opinionated shibboleth such as "badidea" or "thisisunsafe" to proceed. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/35274659/does-using-badidea-or-thisisunsafe-to-bypass-a-chrome-certificate-hsts-error https://stackoverflow.com/questions/35274659/does-using-badi... The subject of the OP is what was originally supposed to be a "non-commercial" TLD, which since abandoned that designation and began charging fees, and, more importantly, the current and future lack of any restrictions on raising those fees. If one is using a TLD in ways that demand transparency, e.g., to represent an entity that is taking money from the public, then involving a third party that accepts personally identifiable information, e.g., a registrar, makes some sense. However, interactions with the public, e.g., commercial uses, are not the only ways the internet can be used and such uses are not the only way domains can be used.