24 ms·
I wonder if some anti-“west” military alliances are eligible to get their own .int just like nato.int
by Scoundreller 11mo ago
I wonder if some anti-“west” military alliances are eligible to get their own .int just like nato.int
- Symbiote 11mo agoThere'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 agoEven if they dejure meet the requirements, I suspect that IANA would be under heavy political pressure to deny the claim.
- walletdrainer 11mo agoI suspect that exactly no-one cares about .int domains
- dragonwriter 11mo agoThey 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