Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

ICANN to Incorporate TLDs Already In-use?

Cliff posted more than 10 years ago | from the where-do-we-go-we-just-don't-know dept.

The Internet 262

An anonymous reader asks: "I recently found an article at cnn.com about ICANN considering new top level domains. Some of the proposed TLDs have already been introduced by YOUCANN such as .xxx and have been available to the public at select registrars such as new.net for quite some time. If ICANN incorporates already existing TLDs how will this impact those who have already registered for domain on these TLDs? What implications does this have and how will the ramifications impact how businesses view and utilize the web?"

cancel ×

262 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The Wild Wild Web is born again... (5, Interesting)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652574)

Simply put, if ICANN adopts a TLD that duplicates a TLD that "unofficially" is being registered by another registration system, then we'll have a fracturing in the standards just like in the way that it's almost impossible to tell who the heavyweight boxing champion is. Whenever you have multiple self-appointed authorities, you're bound to have conflicts.

At the technical level, most users see the domain-name world through the eyes of the DNS servers at their ISP, so in order for a new TLD to be valid for that user the ISP must honor it. However, this can be overridden by using a secondary DNS server or modifying the hosts file on the users side, so we may end up seeing a wave of malware trying to monkey with a users DNS settings so that their sponsor's regisitry becomes the first one consulted. Some of the other registrars have already resorted to distributing such software in order for their domains to be valid for anybody.

At the legal level, an "I got here first" principle will be claimed in trademark lawsuits by the business interest behind these rogue TLD operations. That's going to be a bit of an iffy question, if trademark law really applies to an entire TLD, especially when ICANN is the generally accepted certifying body for TLDs.

So in the end, businesses who don't want a domain name to "fall into enemy hands" are going to have to register the same domain twice, because when this dispute is finally settled, one of the two registrations will be null and void, but it'll be hard to tell which.

Seems to me like the domain name system may get pushed over the edge on this one. It was bad enough when US businesses started to buy up top-level domains from countries that were lucky enough to have two-letter TLDs that had cute meanings to US audiences. This would even further create a "wild west" nature for domain names. ICANN's authority is downright questionable at times, and now they're about to have conflicts with pretenders to the throne.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (3, Insightful)

Canberra Bob (763479) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652603)

And thus dawns a new age of litigation (as if the old one had ever finished).

As usual, the only winners in this will be the lawyers.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652632)

The question people really want answered is did ICANN off John Postel?

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (4, Insightful)

Chess_the_cat (653159) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652634)

Blah, blah, blah. Look, new.net is not selling REAL TLDs. You've got to download a plugin for them to be visible to your browser. Since they're not real TLDs, fuck 'em and their customers for being stupid. Case closed.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (3, Insightful)

Adam9 (93947) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652812)

shell:~$ host www.opennic.glue
www.opennic.glue has address 131.161.247.68

Oh, I guess .glue isn't a "REAL TLD" because you don't see it on your nameserver? Give me a break.

Open your eyes, there is more than one namespace in the world. Just because you may be a loyal follower of ICANN doesn't mean that everyone else is.

That plugin just tells that computer to resolve certain TLDs elsewhere.

Sure, the domains for those "alternative" TLDs may be overpriced, but that's their choice if they want to buy them.

ICANN introduced a colliding TLD of .biz, and if they want to do it again with .xxx, they can go ahead. I'm not going to honor it. OpenNIC recognizes Alternic as the maintainer of .xxx, and it'll remain that way on my nameserver until Alternic decides/acts otherwise.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652890)

It is because of tools such as yourself that have turned the Internet into a clusterfuck. Yes there is a REAL Internet, and NO it does not include all those FAKE TLDs.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (4, Insightful)

NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652897)

If it uses a plugin, it hardly counts. A web browser only solution is hardly a solution at all, and just shows how clueless newnet is.

I won't even get into the whole distributing it as spyware thing... ok, I can't resist a parting shot. Uninstalling it didn't work, and manually cleaning the registry didn't either, it had sabotaged the network stack. Reinstalling win2000 over the top of the old didn't fix loss of network connectivity, and she can't move her important files off of it so I can reinstall properly.

All so they could try and sell their asshat, overpriced TLDs.

I have my own set of TLDs, carefully chosen so that I'm unlikely to ever fall victim to ICANN. Anyone not doing the same thing is a fool.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652979)

Some pathetic New.Net moderator is going around trying to mod down "spyware" claims. These guys really suck big fat dicks.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (1)

Adam9 (93947) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652996)

It's been years since I've seen an installation of newnet. Last time I saw it, I thought it changed some windows settings to use alternative nameservers.

In either case, I agree that it's trash.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652641)

> we'll have a fracturing in the standards

The RFCs seem to be written around the idea that there is only one Domain Name namespace -- originally controleld by Jon Postal, now controlled by ICANN.

PS: Who has ever heard of UCANN? I highly doubt they are first "alternate DNS" to get the idea of starting .xxx.

YEEEEAAAHHHHH (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652653)

Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted! [about.com]
Reason: Too much repetition.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (3, Funny)

mat catastrophe (105256) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652696)

"so we may end up seeing a wave of malware trying to monkey with a users DNS settings so that their sponsor's regisitry becomes the first one consulted."

Funny, I thought new.net was malware.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (3, Insightful)

eric76 (679787) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652739)

It is malware.

It should be removed on sight.

If I see it on someone's computer, I strongly advise them to remove it entirely from their computer.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (5, Informative)

eric76 (679787) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652700)

Simply put, if ICANN adopts a TLD that duplicates a TLD that "unofficially" is being registered by another registration system, then we'll have a fracturing in the standards just like in the way that it's almost impossible to tell who the heavyweight boxing champion is.


They've already done it.

.biz was already in use when ICANN adopted it.

OpenNIC [opennic.org] , for one, does not recognize ICANN's use of the .biz domain.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (1, Redundant)

incom (570967) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652973)

Wonder how many people use OpenNIC? I for one do, partially because my ISP's dns servers are constantly down.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652710)

trademarking a tld sounds unlikely. Of course, I can trademark or incorporate as "HotNakedGirls.xxx" regardless of ICANN or whoever.

Anybody who spent money using an unofficial registrar deserves an unofficial tld. You can't expect a $200 fake harvard degree to make you smart.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (-1, Troll)

Rothman Menendez (764005) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652765)

I just pooped my pants.

New.net (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652894)

Actually, new.net works at an isp level by adding their root server as a secondary source - the official root servers would still have priority. Their windows client software is a bit more aggressive, and is bundled with software such as kazaa. If this happened, hopefully new.net would eliminate the entry in their root servers to eliminate confusion and let current customers preorder their domains on the official registry for them to attempt to register once registrations start being accepted... provided they meet the criteria set by the official registrar for that particular domain.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (3, Insightful)

ebunga (95613) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652895)

The ICANN root only has as much authority as you give it. If somebody decides to run an alternate dns root, then that's there thing. Nobody can complain when ICANN creates a TLD in its root, which just happens to be the one most use.

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (1)

brucmack (572780) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652934)

It was bad enough when US businesses started to buy up top-level domains from countries that were lucky enough to have two-letter TLDs that had cute meanings to US audiences.

It's not just the US. There are lots of Danish sites in the .nu domain since it means "now" in Danish.

In fact, when I visit the registration site [www.nic.nu] , it defaults to Danish. (That's possibly because of my regional settings though)

I'm sure the people of Niue aren't complaining about the extra revenue though :)

Re:The Wild Wild Web is born again... (3, Insightful)

cshark (673578) | more than 10 years ago | (#8653042)

The fact of the matter is that systems like new.net are not part of the DNS. The DNS is controlled by ICANN. Period.

These quasi registries usually require browser plugins loaded with spyware to work at all, and only a fraction of the public internet population even knows they're even there. When ICANN added the .biz registry, the people at one of the alternative DNS places that had been serving up fake .biz domains for years complained. But it boiled over quickly.

ICANN cannot be held responsible for what poeple outside the DNS do to create alternative quasi domains. Unless of course the quasi registrars have trademarked them, which I believe new.net may have.

In any case, this will be interesting.
Can't wait to see the flash based protest movies depicting the ICANN board as card people. Woo hoo!

TLD (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652578)

TLD is entirely overrated. I did research on this subject two years ago and we established that it wasn't worthwhile. Just my two cents.

hi (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652583)

hi

What the hell? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652584)

What the hell is this even talking about?

Re:What the hell? (4, Informative)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652638)

What the hell is this even talking about?

ICANN is taking applications for registratars to oversee newly created TLDs again. However, a "parallel universe" of "unofficial registrars" already exists consisting of registration services that use various tricks to get their TLDs to be recognized by some subset of the browsing universe. The question is, if ICANN certifies a TLD that already exists "unofficially" to a different registrar, what will happen to the already existing namespace?...

It seems to be two overlapping namespaces headed for a train wreck... leading to questions over how much authority ICANN really has, and what will become of the pretenders to ICANN's throne. We're likely going to end up with multiple domain sellers claiming the root title over the same namespace, and that'll make a mockery of the whole DNS system.

Re:What the hell? (4, Interesting)

Geoffreyerffoeg (729040) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652708)

The ICANN has authority over domain name assignments for most top-level domains (*.com, *.net, *.org, country codes, new stuff line *.info, etc.) and has been assigned the power to create new TLDs.

Other groups have decided they want their own TLDs, so they set up their own name servers (which resolve host names into actual computer IP addresses) with the addition of databases for, e.g., *.web, *.sex, etc. This is unnofficial but technically extremely easy.

ICANN is thinking of asserting its given power over all registries and creating its own official databases for the currently unofficial TLDs. This can cause conflicts with people who have taken domain names with unofficial registries. The fault in my opinion lies with the unofficial registries for advertising an incompatible solution (to use these new names, you need to change your Internet connection settings), but the people who have registered will be in trouble if ICANN starts resolving these new domains and returning "no such domain" for ones that are unofficially registered (and of course vice versa).

They're screwed. (1, Insightful)

glrotate (300695) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652601)

That's what they get for trying to squat.

Re:They're screwed. (1)

thryllkill (52874) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652869)

What are you talking about? This is not a case of domain squatting.

This (4, Interesting)

AnonymousCowheart (646429) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652611)

This really aren't new. I mean, they're new to most of the world, but there ARE alternative root servers people can use. Check out open rsc.org [open-rsc.org] they tell you how to change your name server. There was also an article at wired [wired.com] a few years ago that talked about the .biz not really being a new domain. .biz was being used on orsc, and then icann started to use it after orsc. Anyway, just don't think you don't have options.

Re:This (-1)

Sexual Asspussy (453406) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652672)

I mean, they're new to most of the world, but there ARE alternative root servers people can use.

You smelly piece of trash, nobody uses your faggot alternative-lifestyle root servers. Set up your own root servers and you can own .felch and .fist and .hiv along with .com and .net and all the rest -- however eventually you realize that YOU ARE JUST PLAYING PRETEND because no one else in the world uses these servers, they are just there so ass-comptrollers like you can be all like "DERRRR I OWN .RIM"

ICANN is the authority here, and you are left with a limp dick in your hand. you disgust me.

Re:This (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652927)

YOu motherfucking cock sucker!!! I am sick of your fucking worthless posts Sexual Ass Pussy!!! I CALL YOU OUT!!! Every time you post some crap on /. you just drizzle more of your diseased fucking brain rot on the face of of nothingness. I hate you Sexual Ass Pussy. Do you hear that? I fucking hate you and the one trick pussy you came out of. You're a worthless cuntflap with absoutely no sense of the real world. I will ask you to go to the nearest medicine cabinet and O.D. on everything within it so that you can leave this world and realize that NO ONE is going to care at all beause of just how worthless, stupid and ugly you are ou fucking bitchass. Stupid cuntass bitchpole! It would be awesome to know that someone as stupid and cuntlike as you had just taken yourself out of the gene pool. I have every confidence that this is inevitable because you will realize just how fucking worthless you really are. You are a complete loser. A pathetic turd on the face of the planet. You are just a putrid mound of faeces covered with flies. You aren't worth the gunpowder to blow you up with. You have no cock. You are just a pointless piece of gash trash, only mere excreta from your mother's asshole. You weren't born, you were shat. Stupid fucking moronic dildo. Oh what I wouldn't give to meet you in real life and give you a sufficient dressing down. All you ever do is post your pointless and trite shit on Slashdot and you never amount to much of anything. You are a failure in every sense of the word and in so many ways it's amazing you're even alive. Chances are that you are thirteen year old pimply snotbag with no chance of succeeding or maturing. You are not a viable lifeform. You are the perfect posterchild for post-natal abortion. Words that describe you:

A bore
Pile of shit
Smegma
Dingleberry
Bog trotting socksniffer
Horse molester
Honky
Jackass
Dilhole
Damnable fool
Stinking shithole
Festering mound of dung
Ugly Trollbitch
Bastard
Cowardly cunt
Bolus
Cumwad
Jizzgobbler
Stank
Fat blob

When you were born, your mother said, "What's that horrible smell"???! You are unloved and thoroughly dispicable. NOBODY LIKES YOU. Go dig a fucking ditch and lie down in it because no one will notice your absence you creepy little loser. You're a tool. A cockmonger. A bag of foreskins. Take your fucking worthless opnions and shove them up your ass. Oh... that's right, I almost forgot! You don't HAVE an ass because you are a pile of shit! You don't really have anywhere to shove your opinions because your opinions don't count and anything you ever write is always modded down because of what a total cunt you are. A complete shitsmeared total cunt. Bakla! Suck some choad you stupid fucker!!!

Re:This (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652964)

Root server?

I didnt know servers could root!

Help! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652616)

URGENT! I'm going to New York City soon and I need to know if there are any computer stores there. I want to buy a laptop during my visit. Is this possible? Has it ever been done?

Re:Help! (0, Offtopic)

Geoffreyerffoeg (729040) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652627)

Sorry, I don't think so.
Nobody's ever bought a laptop in New York City.
You'll have to compile the machine from the source code, which you can download from the city officials.

Help is provided brother! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652635)

But first I need to know:

What's Your Browser Start Page?

Good question! (0, Funny)

glrotate (300695) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652639)

I'd suggest submitting to Ask Slashdot.

Re:Help! (-1, Offtopic)

raalynthslair (759150) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652687)

Apple Store NYC SoHo http://www.apple.com/retail/soho/ There are TONS of PC sellers there too... just look around.

Re:Help! (2, Funny)

loggia (309962) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652746)

I emailed you the info...

Re:Help! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652733)

There was an Apple store once, about 17 years ago. I remember going there as a little tyke. They're out of business now, though.

Re:Help! (-1, Offtopic)

lukewarmfusion (726141) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652755)

Maybe the other replies are from less addicted Slashdotters, but that's hilarious.

Mod parent up. Hell, mod points for everyone! This round's on me.

Huh (0, Redundant)

elid (672471) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652625)

I don't understand YouCANN. Do they want everyone sitting around making up their own TLD's? Wouldn't that create a big mess?

Re:Huh (4, Funny)

System.out.println() (755533) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652673)

No, that would create http://bigm.ess

Re:Huh (3, Interesting)

PedanticSpellingTrol (746300) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652676)

As far as I can understand they're running a parallel, alternate-universe DNS structure because they're fucktards.

Re:Huh (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652980)

F.O.A.D. Bitch!!! Sometimes people have to break away from the mainstream because the mainstream sucks. Just because everyone likes something doesn't mean that it's good. It just means that the herd doesn't know what's good for them. At one point in time it was considered to be a good idea to wear dead marmots on your head by the majority of society. Any dork who tries to do that now will get laughed at mercilessly. This is EXACTLY what remaining a save o ICANN is like... wearing dead marmots on the head. It's time to take that smelly carcass off of your head and join civilized society. Those of us who have chosen to use alternative namespaces are much more talented and discerning in taste. Once the rest of society awakens and realizes that they have been fooled into being slaves for corporate goons, the will definitely want an alternative namespace. It's just like the IP telephony stuff from Vonage. Do you see people laughing at the folks who are using Vonage to escape the tyranny of the RBOCs? No. Because those people are smart. The same can be said for the people who have chosen to use a different namespace with better TLDs than ICANN has allowed. ICANN is for old farts who don't understand how the world works. Alternative namespaces are for people who grok the internet and what it SHOULD be. ie. Non-commercial. If you like being a slave and using the McNet, then go right ahead and rot your worthless cuntbrain. That's your right. In the meantime I will happily use alternate namespaces that provide access to BETTER resources without the limitations of the fucks at ICANN. Fuck off. Jut fucking fuck off and shove your fist up your ass you bitch. You just ate my balls.

Re:Huh (2, Interesting)

Geoffreyerffoeg (729040) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652736)

No, of course not.
They want themselves making new TLDs and taking registration payments for it.
They see a business opportunity and capitalize. No matter if it's a very risky business if the ones with the true rights decide to assert it (as is now happening).

Re:Huh (1)

SphericalCrusher (739397) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652780)

If they allowed anyone to make one, yes. There would be no stable internet domains, and thus, it would be a lot easier to masquerade as another, popular website.

Hacking and Social Engineering would only be made easier.

My Advice (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652633)

Here's a dime.

Call someone who cares.

From YOUCANN (5, Informative)

mroch (715318) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652637)

From http://www.youcann.org/

Recently, ICANN announced it would add some additional TLDs to their root. However, they neglected to mention that they will deliberately duplicate existing TLDs and cause collisions in the name space. It is important to understand what that means.

If the DoC enters a duplicate .BIZ (or any other duplicate) into their root, thousands of domain names will also be duplicated as more are registered every day. There will be chaos, and registrants will be litigating for years, trying to determine who has the rights to the domains. That is called fracturing the net. You will never be sure which website you will see when you key in an address with the extension .BIZ and if you send email, you will not be certain who will receive it.

The other possibility is that one TLD will have to be excluded from the inclusive name space, disenfranchising thousands of domain name holders. In either case, it is the public which loses.

Re:From YOUCANN (2, Insightful)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652760)

Recently, ICANN announced it would add some additional TLDs to their root. However, they neglected to mention that they will deliberately duplicate existing TLDs and cause collisions in the name space. It is important to understand what that means.

Of course, that's YouCANN's side of the story. But the thing is, YouCANN's domains have never been recognized by the "root nameservers" like all ICANN-approved domain names are.

The problem here is that the ICANN root nameservers derive their authority from, uh, being the ICANN root nameservers. Several other pretenders to the title have created their own nameservers, that you can configure your PC to check as well. Most offer a simple configuration program to do that for users.

So, what happens when two sets of root nameservers both claim to be the authoritative servers over the same namespace... I think that's a lawsuit.

Re:From YOUCANN (0, Redundant)

Adam9 (93947) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652855)

The root nameservers have no inherent authority. The nameserver administrators elsewhere give them that authority.

Re:From YOUCANN (2, Informative)

MechaStreisand (585905) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652999)

The fact that all the nameservers use the ICANN root servers is why ICANN has an inherent authority. The entire inter-net has agreed to use that namespace. They have to, in order for everything to work together. The morons who decided that they wanted to make their own little world with their own fake TLDs have no one but themselves to blame for the mess that is going to happen when the real inter-net decides to add some new names.

Re:From YOUCANN (2, Insightful)

Adam9 (93947) | more than 10 years ago | (#8653052)

Just like how every home in the U.S. has Comcast cable? Right.

Just because you don't believe that you have a choice doesn't mean there aren't any choices.

There are a good deal of nameservers that don't blindly follow ICANN. This doesn't mean we use another nameserver for all .com lookups. Think of it as ICANN's domains plus more.

You may not think that colliding other TLDs is a bad idea, but at least realize that they are introducing collisions.

Re:From YOUCANN (2)

Gr8Apes (679165) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652908)

Lets see, ICANN - recognized authority that pretty much anyone who is anyone utilizes for authoritive DNS. Some upstart goes, hey, I like to sell some folks a new TLD that ICANN doesn't recognize, because it's spiffy and cool, and I can charge extra for it. Who cares if 99% of the folks cannot see it, these chumps won't know. Wait, ICANN is going to use this!?!?! AAAArrrggghh!

The authoritive new TLD completely ignores the squatter as it's squished beneath the wheels of recognized progress. To be honest, this is like setting up a couple of twigs on some ranchers land and then claiming said land as your own. There's a reason ICANN exists. There's a reason "upstarts" aren't recognized.

No sympathy here (or probably from the rest of /.) (2, Informative)

PedanticSpellingTrol (746300) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652645)

It seems pretty simple to me: New.net are malware propagating scumbags and anything that lays the smackdown on them is ok by me. Sure, Verisign has pulled some crazy shit in the past but at least they don't alter your TCP/IP stack.

See Previous discussion here [slashdot.org]

New.net (4, Interesting)

ionpro (34327) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652658)

*Shudder* Their software has been responsible for more screwed up computers in my (university student-serving) helpdesk then virtually any other piece of crapware. I like the idea of getting rid of ICANN, but New.Net is infinately worse.

Waah, waah, waah (-1, Flamebait)

onyxruby (118189) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652661)

So what? Bunch of asshats decide to make their own propietary self serving system and get pissed when the real thing intrudes on their playground? Tell me, why should I be be sypmathetic? We have standards for reasons and they knowingly ignored them in the name of profit. The pretender will be chased out, I just can't bring myself to care.

Re:Waah, waah, waah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652881)

why is icann the "real thing"?

-j

This is going to turn messy (3, Interesting)

metlin (258108) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652667)

Simply put - more confusion.

Those who hold existing domain names are going to try and get the new ones with their domains. And cybersquatters and others are going to try and do the same thing.

Now, the interesting question would be, if I'm a porn site for petite teens, can I legally have the domain, www.microsoft.xxx? ;-)

Um, ICAAN will just make a big mess? (4, Funny)

loggia (309962) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652683)

If ICANN incorporates already existing TLDs how will this impact those who have already registered for domain on these TLDs?

Um, ICAAN will just ignore the other registrars?

Um, ICAAN will have a meeting in [nice country to visit]?

Um, ICAAN will see if we need another museum TLD?

And so on..?

Re:Um, ICAAN will just make a big mess? (1)

mroch (715318) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652698)

4. Um, ???

5. Um, PROFIT!!

Re:Um, ICAAN will just make a big mess? (1)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652702)

This is such a big issue, it make take several meetings. Anybody care to make a list of the tourist traps ICANN hasn't visited yet?

DNS server in URLS? (3, Interesting)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652695)

Perhapse adding the DNS group as an optional component to URLS such as

"http://ICANN`slashdot.org"
"http://OpenNIC`computers.geek"

With "foo" in //foo` being defined either in the HOSTS file or some other new system file

Re:DNS server in URLS? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652785)

What's wrong with
"slashdot.org.icann"
"computers.geek.openni c"?

That's how the DNS system is supposed to work btw.

MOD PARENT FUNNY (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652960)

Please tell me that was meant to be a joke; otherwise, its a terrible idea that would make a complete mess of DNS.

Re:MOD PARENT FUNNY (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8653043)

While it may be technically incorrect in your eyes, this poster has contributed an idea that has an oportunity to do some good. On the other hand,I didn't see you doing much to contribute.

New.Net is spyware! (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652706)

New.Net must die. Their "special DNS software" has sneaked into and completely screwed up thousands of windows systems. Having this crapware sneak onto your system is one thing, but having it corrupt your TCP/IP stack so you can't fix the problem -- manually, or with AdAware or SpyBot Search&Destroy -- is quite another.

I would have pointed you to this link [cexx.org] at cexx.org for info on how scummy new.net is, but if you visit it you'll see that new.net's scumball lawyers forced them to take it down! Instead, see this link for new.net info & removal instructions [spyany.com] .

In summary: FSCK NEW.NET!

Re:New.Net is spyware! (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652814)

This isn't a troll you slackjawed moderators.

Even Microsoft has a support page [microsoft.com] about New.Net's spyware hosing windows.

Interesting tactics... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652956)

You're trying to get /.-drones to reason,
by bringing up Microsoft?

Good luck... (by the way, you're completely right. new.net should be eradicated... its existence reminded me, just how far the script-kiddie mentality pervades the business world. Scary.)

I made up my own domain extentions server (1)

supervillain (737115) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652713)

I better get control of www.sex.xxx and www.nokia.mobi or I will sue

Just a guess (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652722)

This is pure speculation, but my guess would be that ICANN would have no problems with launching domains that already exist on alternative registries. The reason they might do this is simple posturing. If they acknowleged that these domains already existed and refused to "step on" them, they'd be giving legitimacy to these alternate registries. While I have no problem with making room for other registries, ICANN probably does, as it appears to undercut their self-appointed position (with the help of the U.S. government) as the Internet's governing body.

So, to answer your question, I think ICANN would happily launch these TLDs without any consideration at all that they already exist. And yes, this will create a definite conflict with those other registries, technically speaking, since two identical domains can't exist for everyone on the Internet.

Look, this was bound to happen sooner or later, and it's going to come down to a showdown. Do we want a showdown with ICANN and the possibility of overthrowing it as the Internet's governing body? If so, this is the time to get serious about it, since anyone who is running alternative TLDs will either have to get organized and fight or get stomped into the ground. I hate to put it that way, but that's where this is going if ICANN decides to implement these new TLDs unilaterally without any regard to what's already out there.

I know what it will make *me* think (2, Interesting)

0x0d0a (568518) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652731)

This flood of names with very strong reasons to encourage companies to buy another domain name ("You're an adult entertainment company, but you *haven't* voluntarily gone under the .xxx TLD?" "You mean you let someone *else* buy the ford.biz domain?" etc) just reinforces my opinion that ICANN has become a whore to the name registrars. The idea of ICANN is that they make good engineering decisions for the Internet at large, not decisions based on how to maximize name registrar profits.

mar3 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652738)

Are almost available to GAY NIGGERS FROM Working on various what provides the On slashdot.org numbers continue minutes now while decentralized not so bad. To the users. BSD/OS OpenBSD. How many unpleasant 40,000 coming are about 7000/5 world-spanning fly...don't fear You to join the exactly what you've of its core core team. They development models company a 2 mo8ning. Now I have documents like a has steadily the mundane chores BSD manAged to make to keep up as well-known go of the minutiae FreeBSD continues be forgotten in a Current core were Is the worst off OF OPEN-SOURCE. its readers and and financial but I'd rather hear example, if you the system clean paper towels, keep, and I won't national gay nigger knows that ever opinion in other smells worse than a of user base for

Alternative Roots (5, Informative)

amigoro (761348) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652745)

A very interesting article on alternative roots. [dan.info]

Extracts:

A new top-level domain doesn't really exist on the Internet until it is added to the root servers, so that any system anywhere on the net that is seeking that domain can find out from the root where the specific DNS servers for that domain lie.....

the operators of the root servers have a great deal of political power over the domain name system. Presently, these servers are operated by Verisign, but their policies are determined by ICANN, the organization set up to administer Internet naming and numbering schemes. Since ICANN has attracted a great deal of criticism (much of it highly deserved) for its biases towards large impersonal bureaucracies and against individual Internet users, various people have come up with the idea of "fighting back" against ICANN by setting up alternate roots.....

Setting up an alternate root turns out to be a very simple matter. The Internet has always been sort of a "do-it-yourself" thing, not centrally controlled or administered like a proprietary online service.....

a naming or addressing system only makes sense if everybody uses it consistently. If every telephone company had a different idea of how the country and area codes ought to be allocated, so that if your long distance service was with AT&T, "1-212" would reach New York City, but with Sprint the same prefix would reach Los Angeles, then telephone numbers would be in a state of chaos....

Moderate this comment
Negative: Offtopic [mithuro.com] Flamebait [mithuro.com] Troll [mithuro.com] Redundant [mithuro.com]
Positive: Insightful [mithuro.com] Interesting [mithuro.com] Informative [mithuro.com] Funny [mithuro.com]

Re:Alternative Roots (5, Informative)

nelsonen (126144) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652829)

Please get your terminology correct.

Verisgn does NOT control the "root servers". They do operate 2 of the 13 "root servers" under contract. See http://www.root-servers.org/. Verisgn has no direct control over the content of the root servers.

Verisign does operate the .com and .net registries (again under a different contract), which are NOT a root servers. .com is generally referred to as a "global top level domain" (gTLD).

The root servers control where to find the servers for the top level domains (gTLD and ccTLDs).

Summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652753)


YOUCANN to customers: "You can buy a 1337 .xxx domain and sell tons of pr0nz!!1!"

ICANN to YOUCANN: "Fuck off, c4mp3r wh0r3!!!1"

ICANN to YOUCANN customers: "PWN3D"

ICANN sail a boat... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652769)

... canoe?

Down with TLDs! (5, Funny)

xoran99 (745620) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652776)

I say we just memorize IP addresses from now on. From "Hey, run a Google on him." to "Hey, run a 24.175.19.234 on him."

Re:Down with TLDs! (3, Funny)

notamac (750472) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652918)

That's going to be an even better idea when IPv6 hits the streets:

"Hey, run a 6ab7:26bf:800b:eaf0:127e:baff:9091:6542 on him"

Actually... might be kind of fun trying to watch TV "celebs" try to rattle this off at the end of a show.

Re:Down with TLDs! (4, Funny)

CritterNYC (190163) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652949)

I say we just memorize IP addresses from now on. From "Hey, run a Google on him." to "Hey, run a 24.175.19.234 on him."

And with IPv6 it will be even easier:

Is someone using this product name? Let's 3ffe:abcd:1234:9876::d8ef:3364 it.

name based hosting (2, Insightful)

jasonhamilton (673330) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652953)

I'd say there are millions of hosts that are on name based hosting that you wouldn't be able to reach by using ip....

Or were you just trying to be funny?

Re:Down with TLDs! (1)

the_womble (580291) | more than 10 years ago | (#8653000)

Not a bad idea. If we had only numbers as addresses think of all trademark litigation we would have saved. Conflicts about the address scheme would not happen as they would not be worth it. There has been very little conflict over phone numbers

Of course we can not use IPs as people need to be able to change IPs. The ideal system would have been resolving numerical IDs to IPs.

Has anyone ever come up with any radially different way identifying locations? I mean something tht does not involve taking an address and look up the matching IP.

Decentralisation (1)

femto (459605) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652786)

Central control has a tendency to breakdown, or become corrupted/perverted over time. Centralised control also impairs the ability of the Internet to route around such 'damage'.

A (the only??) long term solution is to have a completely decentralised Internet. A corollary of a decentralised Internet is no IP addresses, no domain names, no coordinating body to make bad decisions.

How to do this? Beats me. It's an active research topic. The closest I have seen is freenet [sourceforge.net] , but it still has a long way (and many answerless problems to be solve) before it can be said to work properly.

Anyone know of any other projects/research which are heading in a similar direction?

Re:Decentralisation (1)

arodland (127775) | more than 10 years ago | (#8653002)

i2p [i2p.net] is working on being "decentralized internet", with a distributed naming system, but right now, it uses good old "hosts.txt", based on the YAGNI principle. Still, a project worth paying some attention to, they seem to have gotten some interesting things done already, and they have a sense of direction.

Re:Decentralisation (1)

C10H14N2 (640033) | more than 10 years ago | (#8653045)

ICANN decentralized the root servers from the beginning. ICANN is not even remotely a "centralized" organization as you suggest. ICANN is not simply supported by the United States government--it is global in nature. Just because they have an address in Marina del Rey doesn't mean it is just a U.S. game any more than it does for the United Nations for being on Manhattan. However, ICANN is not a huge bureaucracy. There is very little to corrupt or pervert and the disparate nature of it is designed to prevent that.

It amazes me that the complaints people have with ICANN are of a nature that could not be further to the opposite of reality, thus I wonder if most of the loudest voices have the slightest clue what they are talking about.

Seriously, people, look before you leap:

http://www.icann.org/general/

In comparison... (2, Insightful)

arrow (9545) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652791)

If I start allocating blocks out of, for example, 69.250.0.0/16 and setting up VPNs to make them work... should this bar ARIN from allocating these blocks to legitimate users?

How about if I propose a alternate TLD to an alternate root which conflicts with the ISO code for a country thats forming?

The problem with catering to alternate roots, or alternate registries of any sort for that matter, is your encuraging people to break the standard.

Re:In comparison... (1)

NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652932)

Yes, but the analogy isn't perfect. You can start allocating blocks of 10.0.0.0, and expect ARIN to never come behind you and sell them to someone.

Global DNS needs the same thing, maybe only 1 such TLD, or several. Reserved for private use.

How about me? I proposed not 1, but 6 alternate TLDs. After no short amount of argument and debate, we chose those that were the least likely to be snatched out from under us. We respect the standards, and I for one am philosophically opposed to intentionally creating namespace collisions. Am I, is the rest of my group, doing anything so wrong?

Who the hell wrote the post? (4, Insightful)

PurpleFloyd (149812) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652809)

New.net is NOT a registar in the normal sense of the word. The only place that anyone signing up for a domain with them gets a DNS entry is in the new.net DNS servers - if you register "foo.bar" with them, you get nothing but "foo.bar.new.net" . Of course, they have their spyware-infested "New.net Client" that doesn't just add a default domain to DNS but instead takes over the entire Windows TCP/IP stack and causes serious connectivity issues (I've seen machines that can't access any network because of them). New.net is a scam, which relies on people thinking that just because they can type "foo.bar" into their browser and get their homepage, means that they own the domain "foo.bar" with a legitimate registrar.

Many of the legitimate registrars on the Internet are pretty scummy, and ICANN is coming close to the bottom of the barrel, but they can't touch New.net for pure scam-artist nastiness. Anything that's bad for New.net, their "buisiness plan" and their damn spyware is good for the Internet at large. I would love to see them forced to shut down because there are actual, legitimate TLDs that conflict with their offerings. Unfortunately, they'd probably just update their "client software" to check their DNS servers before anything actually legitimate (like, say, the customer's ISP or a root-level nameserver). Anything bad for New.net is good for the Internet at large. They are nothing but scam artists selling something they don't own (new domain names), and deserve everything ICANN in all its fascist idiocy can throw at them. There aren't many people or companies in the world I would wish that upon, but New.net has made the list in spades.

The new.net domains aren't even really TLDs (3, Informative)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652848)

They're defined as subdomains of .new.net. So that site you just registered is really "www.mygoatpr0n.xxx.new.net"

Take a look at their FAQ [new.net] . To get this to work in linux, you add new.net to your hosts' file's search path, which makes it so if something fails to resolve, it tries again with .new.net added to the end.

ICANN's move doesn't spell trouble for new.net immediately, but the namespace will start to break down when a real www.mygoatpr0n.xxx appears (causing the .new.net version to never be attempted).

New.Net is spyware! (0, Redundant)

dlharper (129703) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652849)

I must concur with the AC post eariler, even repeat it word for word to make the point, Karma be damned.

New.Net must die. Their "special DNS software" has sneaked into and completely screwed up thousands of windows systems. Having this crapware sneak onto your system is one thing, but having it corrupt your TCP/IP stack so you can't fix the problem -- manually, or with AdAware or SpyBot Search&Destroy -- is quite another.

I would have pointed you to this link [cexx.org] at cexx.org for info on how scummy new.net is, but if you visit it you'll see that new.net's scumball lawyers forced them to take it down! Instead, see this link for new.net info & removal instructions [spyany.com].

In summary: FUCK NEW.NET!

We give ICANN it's power by using it (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652900)

The reality is that the only thing that makes ICANN any more "official" than any other "rogue" system is that most people use it. But that does not make it correct. Nothing says that we must use the ICANN system. As a matter of fact, it might be better if GNU came up with their own root domain name servers and give people the option to use a DNS system based upon fairness and integrity rather than simply catering to big business. Why not a DNS system that's free and open?

Astroturf? (1, Insightful)

Hooded One (684008) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652915)

What's with the drive-by modding-down of comments alluding to New.Net's crapware and its tendency to cripple internet connections?

Re:Astroturf? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8652967)

They get modded down because they can't post without a level-head. They resort to swearing like a troll. Simple as that. If they would present their case against new.net more professionally then I doubt they would be modden down so ferociously.

They're not in use. (1)

Gr8Apes (679165) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652938)

Not officially. Can you get to these supposed domains from anywhere? Heck, if that were the case, I can set up my own TLDs, I choose .ford, .gm, .ibm, .ms, .microsoft, .walmart, just for starters.....

A possible solution? (1)

Aaron England (681534) | more than 10 years ago | (#8652962)

Why doesn't ICANN just snychronize it's registered domain database with YouCANN's "unoffical" registered domain database, and thus avoid collisons? Or is ICANN so much of a greedy monopoly that it couldn't possibly share its power, and would rather alienate thousands of individuals who registered with YouCANN in the process?

Re:A possible solution? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8653006)

Im gonna break your legs.

TWICE

Real alternate roots have been done. (3, Interesting)

argent (18001) | more than 10 years ago | (#8653014)

There were quite a few *real* alternate root servers, and some people even used them for a while, Alternic, our own TINC (The Internet Namespace Cooperative), and more. I helped set up one of the first alternate top level domains, the eponymous ".dot"...

Ancient history. Back when it really looked like Network Solutions was going to end up owning the root lock, stock, and root-servers.net it was important. Now, it hardly matters. The real root of the Internet is .com.

This awful kludge new.net is doing doesn't deserve the time it takes to laught about.

For the sake of Fedex (1)

chord.wav (599850) | more than 10 years ago | (#8653031)

DNS - (Domain Name Server) - Used to map names to IP addresses and vice versa. Domain Name Servers maintain central lists of domain name/IP addresses and map the domain names in your Internet requests to other servers on the Internet until the specified web site is found.

Exactly what part of "central" (aka unique) does the people from new.Net and such don't understand??

Imagine what would happen if Lombard Street was known for a bunch of people as 5th Avenue... How the hell would Fedex do their work?

ORSC/youcann out of date. (4, Informative)

bitspotter (455598) | more than 10 years ago | (#8653048)

I've been experimenting with alternative roots over the past couple of months.

The OpenNIC [unrated.net] root zone file [unrated.net] seems pretty stable, and resolves ICANN domains along with opennic's own .geek, .oss, .parody, .indy, .null, and .opennic . AlterNIC and Pacific Root alternate roots seem to be long gone - I haven't been able to find any current information on these alternate roots, and I have yet to come across a root zone file that allows resolution of any of their names (anybody know?).

I tried the ORSC [open-rsc.org] root zone file [vrx.net] , which is FAR more extensive, but it seems to be out of date - I couldn't even resolve some ICANN domains with it!

It seems that the YouCANN and ORSC web sites are possibly horribly out of date - can anyone verify that these projects are even active?

Now for a little editorial criticism: I don't see any indication in the article that ICANN is considering "incorporating" alternative TLDs as much as it's considering bulldozing over them, like it has for .biz . The submitter's take that ICANN roots may soon start resolving these independent root operators is either woefully mistaken or badly misleading.

More TLDs is a waste anyway (2, Insightful)

EvilStein (414640) | more than 10 years ago | (#8653055)

All these "other TLDs" get used for is spam anyway.
Oh, a few get used for silly pages (chicken.coop?) but the vast majority get used for spam.

I have yet to see a .biz or .info TLD that wasn't owned by spammers or some corporation that already owned the corresponding .com,.net, and .org already.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>