3 ms·
Didn't .local start out this way until it was co-opted by Apple for some network abomination? Any new private domain is just going to get co-opted by something
by caymanjim 3y ago
Didn't .local start out this way until it was co-opted by Apple for some network abomination? Any new private domain is just going to get co-opted by something else soon enough. Browser authors and network service authors are going to start using it for random, incompatible purposes and break everything.
If you need DNS, register and use a real domain name. Everything else is going to be a hack. Anyone tech-savvy enough to know what an internal, unroutable TLD is, and have a use for one, is going to be just as comfortable and capable of managing a real domain.
I support the idea of something like .internal, but I'm certain it will be made useless for its intended purpose in short order.
- josho 3y agoI can see one benefit to this approach. Messing up your .internal configuration won’t result in leaking queries to the public. And maybe secondarily this may encourage tool development for supporting internal names and make it easier for setting up informal or per department configurations.
- snakeyjake 3y agoZeroconf is only considered an abomination by folks who view any naming system other than DNS to be an abomination. Domain names are not slaved to DNS, they predate DNS by over a decade, and there is room for more than one naming system. If DNS has to surrender one of their precious, precious, TLDs (lord knows there are soooo few to choose from) which, again, existed BEFORE DNS was even a twinkle in Paul Mockapetris' eye, so be it.