
New top-level domains a money grab and a mistake: Paul Vixie - walterbell
http://www.zdnet.com/article/new-top-level-domains-a-money-grab-and-a-mistake-paul-vixie/
======
NameNickHN
This is not surprising but I fail to see the downside. The internet is complex
already. The new top level domains won't add much to that.

    
    
      I think that there was no end-user demand whatsoever for more so-called DNS extensions, [or] global generic top-level domains (gTLDs)," he said.
    

I run a lot of websites and it was a pain to find good domain names in the
last 15 years. With all the new TLDs that problem is completely gone.

There will be a time when the multitude of TLDs won't bother anyone. Limiting
TLDs doesn't add security. Educating people about the dangers of the internet
does.

~~~
ownagefool
You could also just get people to give up the TLDs they're not using.

I find it somewhat depressing that emailing folks about domain names they're
not using results in either a) being ignored or b) being asked to pay $40,000.

I'm of the view if you're sitting on names that you're keeping around
exclusively because you think they could net you a windfall in the future then
you're a bit of an internet twat.

~~~
calinet6
The high price was an excellent sign that they were overly scarce (for an
otherwise limitless resource), and that more were needed.

I think the new gTLDs are great. Most of them aren't exorbitantly expensive,
and generally speaking they free you up to have an address on the big wild
internet that makes way more sense than the contrived naming conventions we
resorted to using in the past (eg: get[???].com, [???]app.com, both of which I
can think of prime, famous examples in real world use). Is [???].app really
better? Yeah, probably.

~~~
pavel_lishin
Except those will get eaten up rapidly as well. Is [???].horse better than
get[???].com?

------
springboard
Maybe the way it happened involved corruption. But I personally like the new
TLD's, not all of them but some like .team, .work, .chat.

A few other sports specific domains are also nice, like .soccer, .tennis,
.football ...

Almost all of the meaningful .com's .org's and .net's are gone. It's time we
had new TLD's that make more sense.

~~~
marcus_holmes
agree.

I think that a "globally unique brand" will go the same way as a "globally
unique username", for exactly the same reasons.

Goodbye "apple" hello "apple computers"... oh wait, that already happened...

~~~
smacktoward
And then right back again: [http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/apple-drops-
computer-from...](http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/apple-drops-computer-
from-name/)

~~~
marcus_holmes
Which reinforces the point. There are two companies (at least) called Apple.
They are both allowed to have the same name because they are in different
industries.

If we only allow companies to have ".com" then which of these two companies,
both called Apple, would have "apple.com"?

Having multiple TLDs allows for disambiguation. It's a good thing.

------
joshmn
I don't consider this a surprise at all. I see these new ads for things like
".digital" and ".media" and the only thing I can think of is using them for
vanity, such as xyzcompany.media and then using that internally.

It's a shame that ICANN is polluting the internet like this.

~~~
onion2k
To know that abc.media is a media company while abc.auto is a car company
would be good for the user. It makes them less likely to click the wrong link.
Really, more TLDs should just provide a finer grain of information to the
previous '.com is a company and .org is an organisation'. There's no
'pollution' if you're only refining an idea. It's not like .com is going away.

Plus, what's actually wrong with vanity as far as what domain points a
website? What is the benefit in having fewer TLDs?

~~~
perlpimp
host/domain name is way to overabused, people should be using info resouce to
find the site they are looking for. This way chrome stepped in the right
direction moving people away from domains. There can be other
software/internet constructs to navigate to right result, domain names are
just vanity plates. It helps it if it easier to type the domain up but only
for maybe top 10 sites that you use. Those sites are already there and are
well known. for the rest autocomplete, bookmarks and history are used.

what i have been noticing my redirect to search on unknown domain names has
been failing more and more, cause is that there are too many domains other so
if I type "domain names dog", browser can't send me to google anymore to find
if there are domain names .dog, I just get host not found error. Granted this
is not how most users use firefox host tab. However it is clear case where
corporate greed breaks organically grown infrastructure, in our office we use
8.8.8.8 and thats how I know about it.

~~~
icebraining
_what i have been noticing my redirect to search on unknown domain names has
been failing more and more, cause is that there are too many domains other so
if I type "domain names dog", browser can't send me to google anymore to find
if there are domain names .dog, I just get host not found error._

Domains can't have spaces, so if you type as such, you'll still get a search
in any browser (that has search-in-URL-bar enabled, of course).

What kind of realistic search query without spaces and ending in ".dog" do you
see yourself doing?

~~~
DonHopkins
The DOG file type is primarily associated with 'Dogz' by Ubisoft
Entertainment. Holds the graphics and functions of the pet.

[http://filext.com/file-extension/DOG](http://filext.com/file-extension/DOG)

------
rtpg
I understand that the current situation is a bit of a money grab, but what is
the rational for TLDs not being arbitrary in the first place? Isn't it all
just letters anyways?

~~~
gaius
I am old enough to remember when .com .net and .org really did mean what they
said. Now only .edu and .mil do.

~~~
bhartzer
But that's changing. We have closed TLDs like .NYC, whereas you have to have
an address in that geographical area to own one of those.

And we have .bank launching, you have to actually be a financial institution
in order to have a .bank domain.

We will be able to trust those new TLDs, this is all changing back (to the way
it should be).

------
devit
Maybe Microsoft, Google, Apple and Mozilla could get together, and configure
their OSes and browsers to do DNS lookups by default using a system different
than ICANN's via security updates.

That would make ICANN mostly irrelevant in less than a year.

Also, it improves security, since you are already trusting your browser vendor
and would no longer need to trust ICANN, registrars and the CA system as well.

~~~
icebraining
Microsoft, Google and Apple were among the first to apply for the new TLDs
(though the latter just asked for .apple), so why would they now oppose this
scheme?

~~~
devit
I'm not sure that such a thing means they support the change, it's just the
rational thing to do given the change happening.

As for why they would setup an alternate DNS system, they would get power over
the DNS system and the money from domain registrations.

In exchange, users would get more security and website owners lower prices and
more friendly policies (now the reputation of those companies is on the line,
and they care more about it than ICANN since they are selling other things).

There's some anonymity risk though which might lead to strong opposition to
the project if not addressed and while bundling and using Tor would work, it's
not clear if Tor could take a few billion extra users doing tunneled DNS
queries.

------
jamespitts
The new TLDs allow more expressiveness and creativity. IMO, there should be
even more of them. The limitations should be similar to the limitations placed
on searchable results: cost, law, preventing harm, etc.

It is interesting to think about why we are limiting the creativity here. Are
we looking out for a human being's typical memory? A router's memory? Network
capacity? All seem ample to support loads of new TLDs.

------
InclinedPlane
To whom was this not always and immediately obvious?

~~~
sneak
Many, as it was allowed to continue.

------
dibbsonline
ICANN, the FIFA of the internet.

------
sneak
I agree _wholeheartedly_. It's too late now, though. :(

------
bachback
Names on the blockchain for the win. The process is obviously broken and
corrupted - we need protocols at the root.

