4 ms·

I know a lot of folks using .dev for locally running "development" instances of websites/apps. Maybe .local is now a better choice.

• icebraining 12y ago
  .local was already the standard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.local http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.local
• import 12y ago
  .local reserved for special mDNS functionality http://files.multicastdns.org/draft-cheshire-dnsext-multicastdns.txt http://files.multicastdns.org/draft-cheshire-dnsext-multicas...
• cholmon 12y ago
  or .test http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.test http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.test
• ChikkaChiChi 12y ago
  Microsoft documents even dictate using .local, but if you have mDNS on your network you immediately start to run into problems.
• huxley 12y ago
  I used to use .foo, Google acquired that one last year: http://icannwiki.com/.foo http://icannwiki.com/.foo
• hobarrera 12y ago
  .local is reserved for mDNS. I'm not sure why you can't just use the host's real FQDN.
  • jkrems 12y ago
    Because you might want to have multiple vhosts running on localhost, separated by hostname.
    • hobarrera 12y ago
      If you host is, say "zeus.barrera.io" you can use: test-service-1.zeus.barrera.io dummy-server.zeus.barrera.i Etc. No need to create new (possible conflicting, definitely not future proof) TLDs.
      • jkrems 12y ago
        It's not about shared hosts (at least if I'm understanding the topic correctly) but about /etc/hosts entries on your local machine for your local machine. As in: my-test-thing-a.dev 127.0.0.1 my-test-thing-b.dev 127.0.0.1 my-test-thing-c.dev 127.0.0.1 Buying an actual registered domain for that sounds like it would be even more confusing than using an unregistered TLD because it makes it hard to tell which hostnames are expected to work across machines and which are strictly "works on my machine".
• na85 12y ago
  I use .lan