4 ms·

It did always make me really annoyed they didn’t deprecate .gov, .edu and .mil and transition to moving those under .us (as .gov.us, .edu.us and .mil.us). Havi

It did always make me really annoyed they didn’t deprecate .gov, .edu and .mil and transition to moving those under .us (as .gov.us, .edu.us and .mil.us). Having them as basically US-only just reeks of American exceptionalism which most of the world finds very distasteful.

Scoundreller 11mo ago
I wonder if some anti-“west” military alliances are eligible to get their own .int just like nato.int
- Symbiote 11mo ago
  There's a list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organizations_with_.int_domain_names https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organizations_with_.in... I don't see why a non-western military alliance wouldn't be eligible, so long as the meet the criteria — treaty registered with the UN etc.
  - ViscountPenguin 11mo ago
    Even if they dejure meet the requirements, I suspect that IANA would be under heavy political pressure to deny the claim.
    - walletdrainer 11mo ago
      I suspect that exactly no-one cares about .int domains
- dragonwriter 11mo ago
  They would, but even orgs that have historically had .int domains tend to move off them to either their own TLD (like CERN moving to .cern) or to other gTLDs (like the Commonwealth of Nations from commonwealth.int to commonwealth.org.) Ironically, NATO was using .nato briefly in 1990 before moving to .nato.int So, CSTO using csto.org rather than csto.int is probably just keeping up with the times, not failing to get an .int
bigstrat2003 11mo ago
I don't think there's any reason to deprecate .edu and move it under the us TLD. Nothing about .edu is US-specific, unlike gov and mil. You could perfectly reasonably have oxford.edu, etc.
- 6031769 11mo ago
  They already have it and it redirects to the real Oxford site.
drnick1 11mo ago
Cope with it, America invented the Internet so yes, we are exceptional and have every right to use whatever TLDs we created first.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
zokier 11mo ago
I'm annoyed that Postel didn't deprecate .com/.net/.org after ccTLDs were introduced. Would have made DNS so much cleaner and at least have a chance of making the hierarchy/tld somewhat meaningful.

Scoundreller 11mo ago

I wonder if some anti-“west” military alliances are eligible to get their own .int just like nato.int

Symbiote 11mo ago
There's a list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organizations_with_.int_domain_names https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organizations_with_.in... I don't see why a non-western military alliance wouldn't be eligible, so long as the meet the criteria — treaty registered with the UN etc.
- ViscountPenguin 11mo ago
  Even if they dejure meet the requirements, I suspect that IANA would be under heavy political pressure to deny the claim.
  - walletdrainer 11mo ago
    I suspect that exactly no-one cares about .int domains
dragonwriter 11mo ago
They would, but even orgs that have historically had .int domains tend to move off them to either their own TLD (like CERN moving to .cern) or to other gTLDs (like the Commonwealth of Nations from commonwealth.int to commonwealth.org.) Ironically, NATO was using .nato briefly in 1990 before moving to .nato.int So, CSTO using csto.org rather than csto.int is probably just keeping up with the times, not failing to get an .int

bigstrat2003 11mo ago

I don't think there's any reason to deprecate .edu and move it under the us TLD. Nothing about .edu is US-specific, unlike gov and mil. You could perfectly reasonably have oxford.edu, etc.

6031769 11mo ago
They already have it and it redirects to the real Oxford site.

drnick1 11mo ago

Cope with it, America invented the Internet so yes, we are exceptional and have every right to use whatever TLDs we created first.

deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]

zokier 11mo ago

I'm annoyed that Postel didn't deprecate .com/.net/.org after ccTLDs were introduced. Would have made DNS so much cleaner and at least have a chance of making the hierarchy/tld somewhat meaningful.