
New generic top-level domains - darkhorn
http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/delegated-strings
======
GuiA
Lots of LLCs in there. Sounds like companies set up mostly for the prospect of
short term profits, e.g.:

COLLEGE >> XYZ.COM, LLC

UNIVERSITY >> Little Station, LLC

VODKA >> Top Level Domain Holdings Limited (those guys have quite a few such
as "COOKING" and "FISHING")

It used to be that you had to squat the web one domain name at the time, now
you can just squat a whole TLD!

~~~
duskwuff
Many of the LLCs are shell companies. In particular, basically every instance
of "Adjective Noun, LLC" (e.g, "Foggy Sky, LLC", "Little Station, LLC",
"Baxter Hill, LLC"...) is a shell owned by donuts.co, and "Charleston Road
Registry" is a shell owned by Google!

~~~
nandhp
.FOO as well. See
[http://www.google.com/registry/](http://www.google.com/registry/)

~~~
Danieru
They let Google have .ads!

I think that is a bad idea.

------
ama729
If someone else is wondering who is "Charleston Road Registry" it's actually
.. Google.

[http://www.internetnews.com/blog/skerner/who-is-
charleston-r...](http://www.internetnews.com/blog/skerner/who-is-charleston-
road-registry-the-leading-gtld-applicant.html)

Also, it seem the sartup Donuts[0] is snatching a lot of domains using shell
companies[1].

[0][http://icannwiki.com/index.php/Donuts](http://icannwiki.com/index.php/Donuts)
[1]
[http://icannwiki.com/index.php/.voyage](http://icannwiki.com/index.php/.voyage)
[http://icannwiki.com/index.php/.camera](http://icannwiki.com/index.php/.camera)
[http://icannwiki.com/index.php/.guru](http://icannwiki.com/index.php/.guru)

~~~
joliv
For the lazy, Charleston Road Registry has filed for the strings SOY and みんな,
Japanese for "everyone."

~~~
brianbreslin
soy is effectively AM in spanish. yo.soy/google

~~~
timv
So, how long until I can register yo.no.soy/marinero ?

------
Spittie
>Over 1,300 new names or "strings" could become available in the next few
years.

I'm the only one that doesn't like this? Having more domains it's nice, but
having so many just feels overwhelming. I'm also sure that some/many of those
will be completely ignored by everyone, and thus making me wonder why
introduce them in the first place.

~~~
AnthonyMouse
The way they've chosen which TLDs to issue is kind of lame. The entire concept
of some company name as a TLD is ridiculous. It's just namespace pollution.
Using just the TLD without any subdomain is going to invoke bugs in old
software or be confused with a search term in the address bar, and using
'www.chase' instead of 'chase.com' is pointless and confusing.

What they should have done instead is created a bunch of TLDs for various
different industries. Having 'chase.bank' and 'ford.cars' would have made a
lot more sense.

~~~
nightcracker
'www.chase' would be equally valid as 'www.com'. Nothing wrong with it.

------
Gustomaximus
I like the gTLD opening up but the pricing bothers me for 2 reasons;

It's closed off access for ordinary people and businesses at $180k+ setup
pricing & $30k+ per year maintenance. Common access for anyone is a brilliant
feature of the internet where anyone can hang out their shingle on equal
terms. Making parts of domain ownership inaccessible goes against the spirit
of the internet in my view.

These prices seem to have no reflection to cost, so really are a money grab,
and holding anyone with a brand to hostage. Companies will feel pressured to
grab brand names while they see how their usage plays out over coming years.
It feels a bit extortionate.

~~~
danudey
Common people can't afford the required infrastructure to host a gTLD, getting
requests from all over the world. Especially if it gets popular, it'll be
pretty expensive to get into.

~~~
anigbrowl
True, but that's a reason not to be so free with them in the first place. I
see a _lot_ of wannabe-monopolists in this list, eg getting a .actor domain is
easily going to be a must-have for anyone who works in film/TV/theater so
issuing a TLD for that is basically granting a license to tax that entire
profession.

I originally thought this was a good idea when I thought these new TLDs were
going to be trickled out in an orderly fashion. As it is, it looks very much
like a land grab that only rich participants can take part in. I predict the
resulting balkanization of the namespace is going to lead to a collapse of the
web within a decade, in the same way that Archie and Veronica eventually fell
victim to their own complexity and were replaced by something more accessible.

~~~
icebraining
_getting a .actor domain is easily going to be a must-have for anyone who
works in film /TV/theater_

I'm sure the applicants think the same, but I'm completely unconvinced of
that. People have trouble using .info and such already. My guess is that most
such TLDs will be dead on arrival; most people don't even type domains
nowadays, they search and use links.

Having a good Facebook path is probably more important for most people than
any domain will ever be.

------
msvan
Many of these gTLDs sound exotic today, but I bet 10 years from now they will
be nothing special. I for one welcome it, if only to dethrone the dot com. It
doesn't make sense for us all to try and squeeze into the same limited gTLD
space. Perhaps this will be the most efficient way of killing off domain
squatters, by flooding the market with viable domains.

It's just a matter of time before half of all links submitted to HN end with
".js".

~~~
duskwuff
Two-letter TLDs are reserved for ccTLDs - they're assigned based on the ISO
country code (ISO 3166-1) of the country. As there is currently no country
with the country code "JS", the TLD cannot be assigned.

~~~
nmrm
Sounds like it's time to found a new nation-state. National exports will
include whatever I happen to sell on Ebay that year, and millions of dollars
worth of domain names :-)

------
maaku
Am I the only one disgusted by this?

~~~
zo1
Nope, we're with you on this one. It's a flat-out money grab. From an
institution that we expect to keep the internet running. Great idea, right?

You know, instead, they could fix the damn email and content spamming
rampantly going on the internet. But no, those things don't give ICANN yearly
profits. I guess they fail to realize that spam-detection is one of the main
things behind Gmail's phenomenal success since its inception.

~~~
icebraining
_You know, instead, they could fix the damn email and content spamming
rampantly going on the internet._

How exactly could they achieve that?

~~~
zo1
First they could start by revoking domain ownership if spam comes from there.
If it keeps persisting and from multiple different IP addresses from the same
block, start taking IP blocks away until it stops.

Spam email doesn't just appear out of the ether. It comes from an email, a
domain, and finally IP addresses. Now I know the technical details are
lacking, and they obviously need to account for offenders that fix their
stuff, but I'm just trying to illustrate that it is do-able.

The above is for email spam. Content spam is a little bit different, and would
step on quite a few toes. I view content spam as websites that mirror
Wikipedia/SO/GoogleGroups for example. Or sites that simply fill their pages
with garbage, referral links, URL's to game search-engine rankings, etc.
Again, start by revoking the worst offende's domain ownership. Eventually,
you'll be able to get rid of domain-squatters as well because it invariably
means that they have to put meaningful content on their site and not useless
junk. So it's a use it properly, or lose it sort of situation.

The above is just not very easy, and it'll cost ICANN registration fees with
seemingly no ROI. But that's a problem with ICANN. Registration fees started
off as a way to prevent spamming and everyone snatching up all domains, but
it's quickly turned in to a revenue cow for ICANN. They're trying to have
their cake and eat it at the same time. Either they're a non-profit
government/UN organization and function for the public good. Or they're a for-
profit entity and they need to have their MONOPOLY status/powers revoked.

~~~
icebraining
_First they could start by revoking domain ownership if spam comes from
there._

How does email spam come from a domain? You can just set whatever domain you
want in the headers. For a long time, I had spammers using my personal domain
in their From: headers, sent from their servers (I knew because I received
automated replies on my catch-all box). What exactly would be accomplished by
taking away my domain?

As for IP blocks, that's like throwing napalm to kill a few weeds. You'd
affect hundreds or thousands of users of an ISP just to kill a spammer, who
will just move to the next connection.

 _I view content spam as websites that mirror Wikipedia /SO/GoogleGroups for
example. Or sites that simply fill their pages with garbage, referral links,
URL's to game search-engine rankings, etc. Again, start by revoking the worst
offende's domain ownership. Eventually, you'll be able to get rid of domain-
squatters as well because it invariably means that they have to put meaningful
content on their site and not useless junk._

So instead of issuing TLDs, they could start performing censorship. I'm
seriously glad they don't share your views.

Having a website sitting somewhere is not spam. It's not being pushed on
anyone; if search engines are indexing content that their users don't want to
see, that's their problem. It shouldn't require to pass some bureaucrat's
consideration to what is "proper content" to be accessible. Many of us around
the world already find the US' TV censorship quite ridiculous, we don't need
any more of that.

~~~
zo1
_" How does email spam come from a domain? You can just set whatever domain
you want in the headers. For a long time, I had spammers using my personal
domain in their From: headers, sent from their servers (I knew because I
received automated replies on my catch-all box). What exactly would be
accomplished by taking away my domain?"_

Solutions to prevent/combat email header spoofing have been gaining quite a
bit of traction and are quite prevalant. And yes, if that means taking the
domain away from people that don't implement said solutions, then poof you've
lost the domain. It would accomplish getting rid of domain owners that enable
spammers.

 _" As for IP blocks, that's like throwing napalm to kill a few weeds. You'd
affect hundreds or thousands of users of an ISP just to kill a spammer, who
will just move to the next connection."_

If you lease out IPs that have been assigned to you to a spammer, then you
better get him off your network. Otherwise you'll lose your entire block. It's
not rocket science, nor is it overkill. You mention that spammers will move on
to the next connection if they get kicked off. Yeah, well that's not really
ICANN's problem is it, that's up to the IP block lessee's to solve if they
want to start sub-leasing out to unknown/untrusted individuals in the public.

 _" So instead of issuing TLDs, they could start performing censorship. I'm
seriously glad they don't share your views."_

There is a big difference between censorship and removing junk from your
network. Perhaps it is something we should worry about, but we should have
thought of censorship BEFORE we allowed the US to maintain control of ICANN,
don't you think?

 _" Having a website sitting somewhere is not spam"_

Probably not the common definition, but if it pollutes the domain/tld
namespace with useless/junk domains then yes you can call it spam.

 _" It's not being pushed on anyone; if search engines are indexing content
that their users don't want to see, that's their problem"_

I agree with you. However, my point was more along the lines of "use it for
something useful, or lose it" in order to both prevent useless domain
squatting AND content spam.

 _" Many of us around the world already find the US' TV censorship quite
ridiculous, we don't need any more of that."_

Nope, we don't, I agree with you. Hence why I suggested we either treat ICANN
like a for-profit private enterprise with NO government monopoly or privilege
of licensing, OR we damn well make sure it behaves like non-profit acting for
the public good. I.e. no lucrative money grabs such as the one in this
article. Assuming that's even possible with an entity controlled by the US
government.

Look. These are just some ideas we can implement to combat spam and other
malicious behavior on the internet. But sticking our heads in the sand by
ignoring some of these solutions just because they aren't perfect is
definitely not going to fix them. At the very least they're better than what
we have now.

~~~
icebraining
_Solutions to prevent /combat email header spoofing have been gaining quite a
bit of traction and are quite prevalant. And yes, if that means taking the
domain away from people that don't implement said solutions, then poof you've
lost the domain. It would accomplish getting rid of domain owners that enable
spammers._

So if I don't even use my domain for email, I'm liable to lose it because I
don't have the knowledge or even awareness to set up the proper SPF records or
whatever solution du jour? That's a terrible tax on people who just want to
have their own small website.

And what for? If the receivers can check for the existence and SPF records of
the domain, they can also just block email from domains without any valid SPF
records. There's no reason to create such draconian policies.

 _There is a big difference between censorship and removing junk from your
network. Perhaps it is something we should worry about, but we should have
thought of censorship BEFORE we allowed the US to maintain control of ICANN,
don 't you think?_

Not really, because they don't usually censor. It should be something we
should worry about if we gave _you_ the control of ICANN.

 _Probably not the common definition, but if it pollutes the domain /tld
namespace with useless/junk domains then yes you can call it spam._

No, because "useless" is subjective.

 _Hence why I suggested we either treat ICANN like a for-profit private
enterprise with NO government monopoly or privilege of licensing, OR we damn
well make sure it behaves like non-profit acting for the public good. I.e. no
lucrative money grabs such as the one in this article._

I don't see why is this TLD scheme against the public good in any way.
Transferring money from big companies to an organization which provides such a
core service seems great to me, and all the downsides I've been hearing about
are mostly people's aesthetically sensibilities being hurt.

 _At the very least they 're better than what we have now._

Adding censorship is never better.

~~~
zo1
_So if I don 't even use my domain for email, I'm liable to lose it because I
don't have the knowledge or even awareness to set up the proper SPF records or
whatever solution du jour? That's a terrible tax on people who just want to
have their own small website._

I never said that. Are you even trying to have a discussion, or just
disagreeing for its own sake?

 _Not really, because they don 't usually censor. It should be something we
should worry about if we gave you the control of ICANN._

Didn't you just complain about US government censorship in your previous post?
Either way, you're blatantly clumping together censorship with other things,
so it's pointless to discuss this point with you.

 _No, because "useless" is subjective._

Doesn't matter if the majority of people agree with the subjective opinion.
And currently we have the subjective opinion of the few managers of the ICANN
calling all the shots.

 _I don 't see why is this TLD scheme against the public good in any way.
Transferring money from big companies to an organization which provides such a
core service seems great to me, and all the downsides I've been hearing about
are mostly people's aesthetically sensibilities being hurt._

Wow, you didn't actually read anything I wrote about this point, did you?
Guess that wouldn't fit your narrative or suit your argument.

 _Adding censorship is never better._

That's your opinion, really. Again, loaded with a biased and opinionated
definition of "censorship", rendering discussion of this point with you pretty
useless.

Good day.

------
davidu
Navigation has evolved from the address bar to the search bar. DNS is a core
component for transport of most content on the Internet, but for consumers,
it's no longer the prima facie form of navigation.

This is non-additive, imho. And a poor use of ICANN resources.

~~~
lnanek2
Technically, they are probably making a ton of money on it, so I guess you
can't say it is using resources net...

~~~
davidu
mental calories, not dollars. ICANN is spending all their resources on it and
not focusing elsewhere in their operations. Yes, it's making money. But
budgets were already high. Good people (mehmet, etc.) have left.

------
acjohnson55
Wow, just looking at the list so far, it appears the squatting has already
begun in earnest. It's the dot-com land grab all over again.

~~~
marshray
But this time around they raised the application fee by three or four orders
of magnitude to make it more fair.

~~~
PythonicAlpha
Very fair, indeed!

------
augustocallejas
I'm surprised that I don't see .app, which is a gTLD I would consider buying a
domain name under.

~~~
adventured
Did Google acquire that? Or did they officially pull their filing?

[http://domainnamewire.com/2013/03/07/google-says-it-will-
mak...](http://domainnamewire.com/2013/03/07/google-says-it-will-make-app-
blog-cloud-and-search-tlds-open/)

[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/09/google_rejigs_dot_ap...](http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/09/google_rejigs_dot_app_gtld/)

------
techscruggs
Can someone explain to me why they don't just open up every possible string as
a TLD?

~~~
vesinisa
They are making some serious money from this scheme. Google alone has spent
$18.6 million on registration fees of its 101 different new gTLD.

~~~
sneak
Fucking up the whole internet for only a few hundred million dollars seems
really incredibly short-sighted to me.

~~~
icebraining
How are they "fucking up the whole internet"? People are taking their
aesthetically sensibilities way too seriously.

------
jboynyc
Since in addition to .EDU we will soon have .EDUCATION, .UNIVERSITY and
.COLLEGE, Monash University was smart to just get .MONASH.

~~~
HenryMc
[http://about.monash/](http://about.monash/)

~~~
daturkel
So is the schema for these branded tlds supposed to change from our current
name.tld/page/subpage.html to page.name/subpage.html? That strikes me as a
huge waste of time setting up subdomains for what are effectively just pages.

~~~
chrismorgan
As an example of how it can be handled, Monash has
[https://my.monash.edu.au/](https://my.monash.edu.au/) which is already known
by the name my.monash; I expect that they will shift it to
[https://my.monash/](https://my.monash/) in the fairly near future.

What it ends up boiling down to for Monash University is that you can drop the
.edu, .edu.au or .edu.my part. Oh, and you get to cough up a decent amount of
dough for the endeavour (for the TLD application, for TLD maintenance and for
software systems and such).

------
nkozyra
The long wait for clownpenis.fart is over!

~~~
Sivart13
Seems to me the closest we can get from this is clownpenis.farm

------
jheitmann
While I think this whole thing is a useless namespace land grab, I was
pleasantly surprised to hear that there is one slightly useful new TLD:
[http://www.atgron.wed](http://www.atgron.wed)

They're selling .wed domains cheap for the first couple of registered years,
but then charging tens of thousands of dollars per year after 2 years. This is
a smart way to create a short-term use namespace.

------
Donzo
It will be interesting to see how this turns out.

Some of these TLDs will prove to be quite lucrative, others less.

Ultimately, this will benefit site owners.

Most traffic may be derived from search, but direct traffic is not to be
discounted.

It is good that people will be able to get memorable domain names.

Unfortunately, it will be some time until the public is appropriately trained.

Waves of traffic will be lost or misdirected with people mistakenly adding
.com to the URL.

------
shittyanalogy
What happens if you register a domain and do business at some gTLD and the
company that owns the gTLD goes out of business?

~~~
Ellipsis753
I'd assume you'd lose your domain. If you're lucky someone else might pick up
the gTLD and you could probably keep it then.

------
sjtgraham
A bank controlling its own TLD might make phishing attempts easier to spot for
the less technically literate.

~~~
Goopplesoft
Are you required to sell out domains under a gTLD? It'd be interesting to
create some sort of must-be-a-sub-entity TLDs like ".bank" which requires it
members to be banks (similar to .edu and .gov). But I can't imagine any entity
but ICANN itself managing that in a 'fair' manor.

~~~
cenhyperion
I know ".ngo" is planning on being released at some point this year and will
(supposedly) only be available to registered NGOs

~~~
waps
It's like a job application filter. Start working for a .int company, only pay
10% income tax (but still get all benefits everyone else gets, sometimes
more).

------
adventured
Mostly I'm curious how Google is going to handle this. Specifically will they
automatically favor, over time, results for eg .paris, if that tld acquires
enough quality rankings for paris related keywords. And how will Google decide
what's a local vs global tld (again, eg .paris).

------
marincounty
I heard icann charges-- something like $6.50 a domain. Icann seems to have
more money than they can spend. Maybe they should lower the price they demand
for each domain? I understand they need to regulate this industry, but they
appear to be making a bit to much money? I never blamed Godaddy for gouging
customers. I knew icann demanded their cut before any profit to godaddy. (I'm
no fan of Godaddy, but forced to use them because they seem cheaper--if you
know how to cancel their money making tatics, like constantly changing
renewals to 2 years at full price. And his stupid commercials. If you do get
his .99 cent domains, I think you are allowed two. If you use a different ip
address sometimes you can get more.)

------
nmrm
I found a full(?) list of gtlds as well as other "top-level suffixes" here:
[https://publicsuffix.org/list/effective_tld_names.dat](https://publicsuffix.org/list/effective_tld_names.dat)

I found this via the Chromium source code (search term gtld). Specifically,

[https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/n...](https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/net/base/registry_controlled_domains/registry_controlled_domain.h&sq=package:chromium&type=cs&l=126&rcl=1398070747)

~~~
darkhorn
.ninja is not in the list, yet.

------
Ellipsis753
Whenever I see new top-level domains I can't help but think that the internet
would probably be nicer without any top-level domains at all. You can still
always buy a sub-domain from someone.

Failing that, does anyone know if any of these top-level domains are to be
sold cheaper? ".cheap" is actually not any cheaper than normal but a ".end" or
something which cost only $2 a year might be pretty cool. Of course it'd be
even easier to swat but you shouldn't have any problems if you use a long
domain name.

------
hiphopyo
Wish there was like a mob that goes around beating up squatters.

~~~
zo1
Oh so squatters are bad, but the people that enable them aren't?

What they have now is a devious double-standard system. It starts off with
"first-come, first-serve" and then when money is involved and some large/well-
established entity cries foul, they then change the rules to be "more-money,
first-serve".

Now don't get me wrong, I think domain squatting is a horrible, horrible
practice. But we really need to solve the root of the problem, and that is a
greedy ICANN that enables domain-registrars, and itself, to double-dip the
cake for profit!

------
jonemo
NPR's Planet Money podcast recently had an episode on this titled "The Wild
West Of The Internet". They take a pretty neutral view, but I found the
interviews with people who own some of these TLDs now interesting.

[http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2014/04/16/303735386/episode-...](http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2014/04/16/303735386/episode-532-the-
wild-west-of-the-internet)

------
hrktb
At this point, doesn't it make more sense to have fully arbitrary strings as
domain names, and use something like the last 2 characters to map to the
appropriate top level entity ?

The explosion of top-level domains doesn't seem to serve any real practical
purpose except moving money around, and moving to a better system altogether
would be the logical step.

Or does it solve any technical problem ?

~~~
icebraining
That system would require a complete revamp of the DNS protocol. Adding new
TLDs, on the other hand, is perfectly compatible with existing software.

------
Kequc
I'd like to see a lot more two character or short non-specific domain names.
Personally, I need ".op" but just for general use I feel everyone would
benefit from "theirna.me" style domains. In place of "theirname.food" or
similar.

Is this just a stylistic choice on my part? Or possibly it would be too
difficult to manage on the part of the registrars.

~~~
jfim
Two character ones are for countries, though. What would you do if a private
entity owns ".op" and a hypothetical country of Opzerkistan declares
independence?

As for domain hacks, I think many laypeople just enter "something.com" without
thinking too much. Remember whitehouse.com[1], in the 90's?

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitehouse.com](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitehouse.com)

~~~
Kequc
I suppose the same thing that would happen if there were two independent
countries that start with "Op"... right now there is no ".op" domain and that
makes me sad.

~~~
jfim
True, but they would simply assign them different two letter TLDs. For
example, compare Montenegro (.me), Macao (.mo), Mongolia (.mn), Malta (.mt),
Madagascar (.mg), Mauritania (.mr), etc.

I can understand how it would be frustrating, though. For a long time, the TLD
for my last name (two letter last name) wouldn't allow second level
registration.

------
PythonicAlpha
New gold-rush ahead?

The list feels to me at the first look very similar to the patent system --
everybody is just pitching "their" claims. First come, first money, first
served. The others will stay with the "pack": <longname>.com or
<evenlongername>.de.

~~~
hrktb
I feel this is kind of pointless though. As of now, most people will first do
a search on parts of the domain to go to the right site; having more TLD
around won't reduce this behavior.

~~~
PythonicAlpha
But some reason seems to exist, that makes all those companies paying a stack
of money.

Even if all internet users do so, I think the companies trust to get some
credibility by owning such domains.

------
anigbrowl
Buyers of .ninja domains are going to be surprised when everyone else pre-
emptively blocks them.

~~~
mricon
Clearly something only the pirates would do.

------
legutierr
It's been a while since I've read anything about this. Are new applications
still being accepted, or are these simply approvals of applications that were
submitted some time ago, through a process that is now closed?

~~~
M2Ys4U
The latter.

------
dennyferra
Is that $185,000 per evaluation for a gTLD? Are there other costs involved?

------
Grue3
".онлайн"? ".сайт"? Those aren't even words in Russian language. Why bother
with Cyrillic if you're just going to transliterate English terms?

~~~
jarman
They are legitimate words. It's called loanword

~~~
Grue3
What part of speech is "онлайн" then? I'll give you that "сайт" is a technical
loan-word, though I still can't come up with a situation where something.сайт
would make sense. Of course it's a goddamn site, it's the Internet after all.

~~~
jarman
Saw it used as adjective and noun, with multiple meanings, akin to usage in
english language. And I don't see much sense in '.сайт' too, but I don't see
much of it in most new gTLDs.

------
jmnicolas
VODKA, NINJA and GURU my mind is racing with possibilities.

------
nathanvanfleet
Something like this will happen and then something will happen to finally
eliminate top level domains in the first place or at least remove them from
display.

------
est
Need an auto reg-exp generator from that damn page.

~~~
nwh
[https://publicsuffix.org/list/effective_tld_names.dat](https://publicsuffix.org/list/effective_tld_names.dat)

~~~
voltagex_
Any idea why people would want their tld removed from that? e.g. nsw.gov.au

~~~
timv
My guess would be that they want to be able to share cookies across their sub-
domains.

That file is saying that we should effectively treat:

 _education.vic.gov.au_ and _courts.vic.gov.au_ as being independent entities
that happen to both use the "vic.gov.au" domain, but otherwise have nothing in
common (as far as same-origin policies go)

But

 _fairtrading.nsw.gov.au_ and _housing.nsw.gov.au_ as being separate sub-
domains operated by the same entity (in this case the NSW gov't)

It's certainly _easier_ for those who operate site on that domain if they can
implement single sign on, and cross-(sub)-domain resource loading without
needing to jump through hoops like CORS.

However, since nsw.gov.au is also farmed out to every local council in the
state as well as every government department, it's putting the security of
your cookies into the hands a lot of organisations over which you have very
limited control.

------
azinman2
CITIC Group, NeuStar Inc., Samsung?

Why are these companies having TLDs, and ICANN approving it? There's zero
logic to all of this!

~~~
r00fus
Clearly $$ > Logic. I think that's something you learn in business math class.

------
meisterbrendan
I wonder how long it will take for users to get into the habit of using TLDs
other than their country default.

------
dk8996
Where can I start registering name with the new LTD? I am really interested in
.foo and .ing

------
lnanek2
Interesting where an Inc. company now owns a geographic location, like
.OKINAWA

------
turnersr
The data in csv form can be found at
[https://gist.github.com/turnersr/11163058#file-gtlds-
csv](https://gist.github.com/turnersr/11163058#file-gtlds-csv) .

Here are the registries and the number of strings that were assigned. I'm only
showing the ones with a count above one. The rest are at
[https://gist.github.com/turnersr/11163058#file-registry-
coun...](https://gist.github.com/turnersr/11163058#file-registry-counts) .

Uniregistry, Corp. 9 ['COUNTRY', 'CHRISTMAS', 'PICS', 'PHOTO', 'GIFT', 'LINK',
'GUITARS', 'SEXY', 'TATTOO']

Afilias Limited 8 ['BLACK', 'MEET', '\xe7\xa7\xbb\xe5\x8a\xa8 (xn--6frz82g)
\xe2\x80\x93 Chinese for "mobile"', 'BLUE', 'KIM', 'PINK', 'RED', 'SHIKSHA']

United TLD Holdco Ltd. 7 ['DEMOCRAT', 'SOCIAL', 'MODA', 'DANCE', 'IMMOBILIEN',
'KAUFEN', 'NINJA']

United TLD Holdco, Ltd. 7 ['ROCKS', 'CONSULTING', 'HAUS', 'PUB', 'ACTOR',
'REVIEWS', 'FUTBOL']

Top Level Domain Holdings Limited 6 ['VODKA', 'COOKING', 'RODEO', 'HORSE',
'FISHING', 'MIAMI']

Public Interest Registry 4 ['\xe6\x9c\xba\xe6\x9e\x84 (xn--nqv7f) \xe2\x80\x93
Chinese for "agencies/institutions"',
'\xe0\xa4\xb8\xe0\xa4\x82\xe0\xa4\x97\xe0\xa4\xa0\xe0\xa4\xa8 (xn--
i1b6b1a6a2e) \xe2\x80\x93 Hindi for "organization/sangathana"',
'\xe7\xbb\x84\xe7\xbb\x87\xe6\x9c\xba\xe6\x9e\x84 (xn--nqv7fs00ema)
\xe2\x80\x93 Chinese for "organization"', '\xd0\xbe\xd1\x80\xd0\xb3 (xn--
c1avg) \xe2\x80\x93 Russian for "organization/org"']

GMO Registry, Inc. 3 ['YOKOHAMA', 'TOKYO', 'NAGOYA']

CORE Association 3 ['\xd8\xa8\xd8\xa7\xd8\xb2\xd8\xa7\xd8\xb1 (xn--mgbab2bd)
\xe2\x80\x93 Arabic for "bazaar/bazar"',
'\xd0\xbe\xd0\xbd\xd0\xbb\xd0\xb0\xd0\xb9\xd0\xbd (xn--80asehdb) \xe2\x80\x93
Russian for "online"', '\xd1\x81\xd0\xb0\xd0\xb9\xd1\x82 (xn--80aswg)
\xe2\x80\x93 Russian for "site"']

Top Level Design, LLC 2 ['INK', 'WIKI']

BusinessRalliart Inc. 2 ['RYUKYU', 'OKINAWA']

Punto 2012 Sociedad Anonima Promotora de Inversion de Capital Variable 2
['REST', 'BAR']

NetCologne Gesellschaft für Telekommunikation mbH 2 ['COLOGNE', 'KOELN']

XYZ.COM, LLC 2 ['COLLEGE', 'XYZ']

China Organizational Name Administration Center 2 ['\xe5\x85\xac\xe7\x9b\x8a
(xn--55qw42g) \xe2\x80\x93 Chinese for "charity"', '\xe6\x94\xbf\xe5\x8a\xa1
(xn--zfr164b) \xe2\x80\x93 Chinese for "government"']

I-REGISTRY Ltd. Niederlassung Deutschland 2 ['RICH', 'ONL']

TLD Registry Limited 2 ['\xe4\xb8\xad\xe6\x96\x87\xe7\xbd\x91 (xn--fiq228c5hs)
\xe2\x80\x93 Chinese for "Chinese network"', '\xe5\x9c\xa8\xe7\xba\xbf (xn--
3ds443g) \xe2\x80\x93 Chinese for "online"']

Koko Station, LLC 2 ['VISION', 'VILLAS']

Monolith Registry LLC 2 ['VOTE', 'VOTO']

Computer Network Information Center of Chinese Academy of Sciences (China
Internet Information Center) 2 ['\xe7\xbd\x91\xe7\xbb\x9c (xn--io0a7i)
\xe2\x80\x93 Chinese for "network"', '\xe5\x85\xac\xe5\x8f\xb8 (xn--55qx5d)
\xe2\x80\x93 Chinese for "company"']

