6 ms·

Why does ICANN allow TLDs that are obviously trying to be extortionate? Locked nameservers? Blocked registration? Sunrise period for trademark holders? It's lik

Why does ICANN allow TLDs that are obviously trying to be extortionate? Locked nameservers? Blocked registration? Sunrise period for trademark holders? It's like they're just totally admitting that new TLDs are moronic and pointless and have absolutely nothing to do with increasing domain name space or providing value for the Internet community.

moe 12y ago
Why does ICANN allow TLDs that are obviously trying to be extortionate? Because they collect $0.18 USD per domain per year. It's like they're just totally admitting that new TLDs are moronic and pointless and have absolutely nothing to do with increasing domain name space or providing value for the Internet community. Did they ever claim otherwise?
- MichaelGG 12y ago
  I remember seeing something about how .museum and .aero and a lot of the first round of dumbass-TLDs was announced. Despite the only .aero I've ever seen was Boingo which seemed like a rather tenuous link. They offer WiFi all over, including airports, so that makes them aerospace? There's a really great yogurt/oatmeal place in SFO in Terminal 3 -- should they have whateverfraiche.aero, too? And at some point I thought it was, well, at least about DNS. But registrations with no nameservers, or registrations purely to "block" registration seems rather much opposite of resolving names. The justification for these new names is some of the dumbest I've read. I think Canon or some camera company was saying that with their own TLD, users could automatically share photos. ... WTF? What does that have to do with anything? It's just bizarre. The best idea is probably just allowing anyone any domain, anytime, for some smallish price. Or force a standard registrar agreement so anyone can buy any second level from any registrar. Then we can just go back to ignoring all these terrible special TLDs. Why get .sucks, when you can have .blows, or .isshit or any other name.
rtpg 12y ago
on the inverse, why are there any TLD restrictions at all? Why can't google get google.chrome? It's just a text field, after all This is a serious question, because I know a lot of people are against the expansion of TLDs (now I wouldn't have put .sucks on the top of my list for expansion, but...) and I haven't seen a real argument against it.
- quotemstr 12y ago
  DNS is hierarchical. You know those dots? They actually mean something. Each name is a separate layer you have to query. Each one means more work for people who maintain infrastructure like the public suffix list[1]. Sure, each one might not count for much, but a world with thousands of TLDs isn't better for anyone. Besides: TLDs function as a lexical tagging mechanism. When you see a string of letters like "foo.com", you recognize the word as a domain name because it's tagged with ".com". If we have thousands of TLDs, it's harder to recognize domain names as domain names. I don't think any of these concerns will stop our descent to the world of unstructured AOL-keywords-as-DNS, though, and that's a shame. [1] https://publicsuffix.org/list/effective_tld_names.dat https://publicsuffix.org/list/effective_tld_names.dat
  - vortico 12y ago
    Domain names are a mess. They're backwards (should be us.ag.bobsforestryservice), and since most domains just end with .com, there's no hierarchy. In my opinion, if ICANN wanted a hierarchy, they should be strictly regulating the names, including checking ownership of trademark, checking country of registration, etc. So thus we have AOL keywords.
    - quonn 12y ago
      > and since most domains just end with .com, there's no hierarchy That's a very US-centric view. In most countries the local ccTLD will dominate, so there is _some_ hierarchy.
      - zo1 12y ago
        Yes, and I got downvoted by this crowd last time I mentioned as much. Some random SF-specific project launches, and snags up yet another .com domain. It's not even something like "san_fran_project.com", it was even more generic. On that note, I'm fully with the GP. This sort of thing should be enforced. It would help with everything from spam, to fake sites, to weird domain name pollution as discussed here.
    - 12y ago
kudu 12y ago
The whole NewTLD project is a misguided, worthless money grab by ICANN which doesn't make sense on a lot of levels. At this point, why even expect them to apply any sort of logic for the common good?
- yid 12y ago
  Money grab? In some circles, that's called monetization.
  - superuser2 12y ago
    ICANN is not a startup, it's a shepherd of a public resource.
- cm2187 12y ago
  The alternative is cybersquatting of rarified available domain names which isn't exactly moral.
- amelius 12y ago
  Having a bigger namespace leaves less room for domain squatters, so this is a good thing IMHO. Also, being able to get the domain name you want is a form of free speech, and we should be open to it, even if the intent is to discredit a company.
  - rmc 12y ago
    > Also, being able to get the domain name you want is a form of free speech Many places and people believe there should be limits to free speech if it's in the public good.
    - belorn 12y ago
      Those places has a legal system with laws, courts, lawyers and judges in order to define the limits of free speech. Is there a strong argument why that system has failed here, and why ICANN should step in and police?
rm445 12y ago
Why is it a given that such names are extortionate? Whatever the wisdom (or not) of opening up the top-level hierarchy, there's a place for sites saying things suck. If companies want to engage in the futile enterprise of buying up and controlling every name that might host a site that could be critical, they don't deserve sympathy.
DanBC 12y ago
What's the difference between companysucks.com and company.sucks?
nodata 12y ago
Because free speech? One example: Paypal Sucks was a great website that impacted a big company by bringing their terrible policies to people's attention. Should they also police anti-gay marriage domains, and pro Westboro Baptist Church domains?
Cakez0r 12y ago
The blog post links this article, which says: "IPC also points out a peculiar change to the standard new TLD contract that’s in the .Sucks agreement with ICANN. It includes an additional fee for Vox Populi with $100,000 upfront and $1 for each additional transaction for up to 900,000 transactions. It’s very odd that a registry would agree to pay this additional amount to ICANN."
walshemj 12y ago
well ICANN isn't referred to as ICANT for no reason - A lot of people have serious issues with ICANN and its poor governance.
gwu78 12y ago
Ask yourself a simple question: Where does ICANN derive its "authority"? Does it even have any "authority"? To do what? Is there anything to stop anyone besides ICANN from setting up a network of FTP mirrors that offer a "clean" root.zone file, free from "new" TLD's? No. I remember the day when ICANN most recently changed the IP they use for the ftp servers that serve the root.zone file. (It does not change very often; it does not rely on DNS!) I also remember the day that this small text file doubled in size to accomodate all the "new" TLD's. Nothing was mentioned on HN. I guess not many folks use this file? I use it every day. Is there anything to stop DNS admins from using some other zone file (e.g. editing the one provided by ICANN)? Maybe, but one can only wonder what these things would be. Another simple question: Why follow ICANN as some sort of "steward" of internet naming? Because there is no possible alternative? We have already shown at least one reason not to follow ICANN. Maybe there are others?
- ajani 12y ago
  Could you elaborate? Do you have any possible alternatives in mind? Also very curious to know why you need to work with the zone file on a daily basis?
oliwarner 12y ago
Why does ICANN do anything? Money. Sounds cynical, but seriously, very few of their actions make the internet a better place, only them richer.

moe 12y ago

Why does ICANN allow TLDs that are obviously trying to be extortionate? Because they collect $0.18 USD per domain per year. It's like they're just totally admitting that new TLDs are moronic and pointless and have absolutely nothing to do with increasing domain name space or providing value for the Internet community. Did they ever claim otherwise?

MichaelGG 12y ago
I remember seeing something about how .museum and .aero and a lot of the first round of dumbass-TLDs was announced. Despite the only .aero I've ever seen was Boingo which seemed like a rather tenuous link. They offer WiFi all over, including airports, so that makes them aerospace? There's a really great yogurt/oatmeal place in SFO in Terminal 3 -- should they have whateverfraiche.aero, too? And at some point I thought it was, well, at least about DNS. But registrations with no nameservers, or registrations purely to "block" registration seems rather much opposite of resolving names. The justification for these new names is some of the dumbest I've read. I think Canon or some camera company was saying that with their own TLD, users could automatically share photos. ... WTF? What does that have to do with anything? It's just bizarre. The best idea is probably just allowing anyone any domain, anytime, for some smallish price. Or force a standard registrar agreement so anyone can buy any second level from any registrar. Then we can just go back to ignoring all these terrible special TLDs. Why get .sucks, when you can have .blows, or .isshit or any other name.

rtpg 12y ago

on the inverse, why are there any TLD restrictions at all? Why can't google get google.chrome? It's just a text field, after all This is a serious question, because I know a lot of people are against the expansion of TLDs (now I wouldn't have put .sucks on the top of my list for expansion, but...) and I haven't seen a real argument against it.

quotemstr 12y ago
DNS is hierarchical. You know those dots? They actually mean something. Each name is a separate layer you have to query. Each one means more work for people who maintain infrastructure like the public suffix list[1]. Sure, each one might not count for much, but a world with thousands of TLDs isn't better for anyone. Besides: TLDs function as a lexical tagging mechanism. When you see a string of letters like "foo.com", you recognize the word as a domain name because it's tagged with ".com". If we have thousands of TLDs, it's harder to recognize domain names as domain names. I don't think any of these concerns will stop our descent to the world of unstructured AOL-keywords-as-DNS, though, and that's a shame. [1] https://publicsuffix.org/list/effective_tld_names.dat https://publicsuffix.org/list/effective_tld_names.dat
- vortico 12y ago
  Domain names are a mess. They're backwards (should be us.ag.bobsforestryservice), and since most domains just end with .com, there's no hierarchy. In my opinion, if ICANN wanted a hierarchy, they should be strictly regulating the names, including checking ownership of trademark, checking country of registration, etc. So thus we have AOL keywords.
  - quonn 12y ago
    > and since most domains just end with .com, there's no hierarchy That's a very US-centric view. In most countries the local ccTLD will dominate, so there is _some_ hierarchy.
    - zo1 12y ago
      Yes, and I got downvoted by this crowd last time I mentioned as much. Some random SF-specific project launches, and snags up yet another .com domain. It's not even something like "san_fran_project.com", it was even more generic. On that note, I'm fully with the GP. This sort of thing should be enforced. It would help with everything from spam, to fake sites, to weird domain name pollution as discussed here.
  - 12y ago

kudu 12y ago

The whole NewTLD project is a misguided, worthless money grab by ICANN which doesn't make sense on a lot of levels. At this point, why even expect them to apply any sort of logic for the common good?

yid 12y ago
Money grab? In some circles, that's called monetization.
- superuser2 12y ago
  ICANN is not a startup, it's a shepherd of a public resource.
cm2187 12y ago
The alternative is cybersquatting of rarified available domain names which isn't exactly moral.
amelius 12y ago
Having a bigger namespace leaves less room for domain squatters, so this is a good thing IMHO. Also, being able to get the domain name you want is a form of free speech, and we should be open to it, even if the intent is to discredit a company.
- rmc 12y ago
  > Also, being able to get the domain name you want is a form of free speech Many places and people believe there should be limits to free speech if it's in the public good.
  - belorn 12y ago
    Those places has a legal system with laws, courts, lawyers and judges in order to define the limits of free speech. Is there a strong argument why that system has failed here, and why ICANN should step in and police?

rm445 12y ago

Why is it a given that such names are extortionate? Whatever the wisdom (or not) of opening up the top-level hierarchy, there's a place for sites saying things suck. If companies want to engage in the futile enterprise of buying up and controlling every name that might host a site that could be critical, they don't deserve sympathy.

DanBC 12y ago

What's the difference between companysucks.com and company.sucks?

nodata 12y ago

Because free speech? One example: Paypal Sucks was a great website that impacted a big company by bringing their terrible policies to people's attention. Should they also police anti-gay marriage domains, and pro Westboro Baptist Church domains?

Cakez0r 12y ago

The blog post links this article, which says: "IPC also points out a peculiar change to the standard new TLD contract that’s in the .Sucks agreement with ICANN. It includes an additional fee for Vox Populi with $100,000 upfront and $1 for each additional transaction for up to 900,000 transactions. It’s very odd that a registry would agree to pay this additional amount to ICANN."

walshemj 12y ago

well ICANN isn't referred to as ICANT for no reason - A lot of people have serious issues with ICANN and its poor governance.

gwu78 12y ago

Ask yourself a simple question: Where does ICANN derive its "authority"? Does it even have any "authority"? To do what? Is there anything to stop anyone besides ICANN from setting up a network of FTP mirrors that offer a "clean" root.zone file, free from "new" TLD's? No. I remember the day when ICANN most recently changed the IP they use for the ftp servers that serve the root.zone file. (It does not change very often; it does not rely on DNS!) I also remember the day that this small text file doubled in size to accomodate all the "new" TLD's. Nothing was mentioned on HN. I guess not many folks use this file? I use it every day. Is there anything to stop DNS admins from using some other zone file (e.g. editing the one provided by ICANN)? Maybe, but one can only wonder what these things would be. Another simple question: Why follow ICANN as some sort of "steward" of internet naming? Because there is no possible alternative? We have already shown at least one reason not to follow ICANN. Maybe there are others?

ajani 12y ago
Could you elaborate? Do you have any possible alternatives in mind? Also very curious to know why you need to work with the zone file on a daily basis?

oliwarner 12y ago

Why does ICANN do anything? Money. Sounds cynical, but seriously, very few of their actions make the internet a better place, only them richer.