No more dot coms?

TheGoodTexan · June 27th, 2008, 11:46 AM

I heard on the radio this morning that some international internet commitee has decided that we'll no longer have to use .com, .net, .org .... etc. after an internet address.

It was a serious news report...not joking. But I haven't heard anything else about it. Can find any news about it on the web...yet.

hmmm

surfoverb · June 27th, 2008, 11:51 AM

I lived in SFCA during the '.Com Bomb' I think they called it and I remember being in a cafe where at another table were a bunch of 20 something dot commers and the leader was asking them, "Well it's your future WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO?"

aznrambo481 · June 27th, 2008, 11:53 AM

That's odd... what will happen between different countries? Fore example... there's a google.com, google.fr, google.de, google.co.jp...

TheGoodTexan · June 27th, 2008, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aznrambo481

That's odd... what will happen between different countries? Fore example... there's a google.com, google.fr, google.de, google.co.jp...

I have no idea. I'm not at all an expert on how all that works. I'm sure that a lot of folks here "inna Bad Dog" know much more about it than me.

Now that I think about it.... it may have just been the addresses that actually end in .com, and not all of the other ones. I'm sure that .com is the most popular ending by far.... and maybe you won't have to enter .com anymore....you'll just automatically go to the .com address. But if you want the .org, .whatever.... you will have to enter that.

I dunno.

Maestro · June 27th, 2008, 12:20 PM

the extension is going to become free so Microsoft can call sites microsoft.MS or you get basketball.sport

telecaster.fender etc but you'll still need to type in an extension, you'll just get to choose when you buy a website. Though you'll probably have to pay extra to get your own extension.

so Paul could give all the forums a .guitar extension. Tele.guitar Strat.guitar etc

Televison programs could do this also:
Oreillyfactor.fox for example

getbent · June 27th, 2008, 12:30 PM

just because you don't have to use .com doesn't mean we won't be able to. The idea is to open up the namespace to allow for opportunity and growth. they aren't ending one thing and starting another...it is just to provide for growth and flexibility.

eryque · June 27th, 2008, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by getbent

just because you don't have to use .com doesn't mean we won't be able to. The idea is to open up the namespace to allow for opportunity and growth. they aren't ending one thing and starting another...it is just to provide for growth and flexibility.

That's exactly right. The .com, .org, .gov, etc. domains are more or less an administrative thing and there's absolutely no technical reason for them. The explosion of websites and the congestion of the .com domain have had the powers that be talking about a solution for a while now.

The .com domain congestion has been problematic for a lot of companies (and other folks too) who have had to make up oddball names because their normal name was taken. Remember when Martin could only be accessed at cfmartin.com? Martin.com and martinguitars.com were both taken.

My favorite web address ever was registered about 10 years ago: allofthegoodonesweretaken.com

getbent · June 27th, 2008, 12:59 PM

Yep. with one tiny exception. There is a technical reason for needing, in layman's terms, a suffix of some sort. The whole concept of namespace (.com, .org .something) is to allow end users to utilize text over numbers. it is easier to remember boobalicious.com than 169.247.36.22. So, the concept of a domain or a place to live that has a name was devised. Pretty dang ingenious too!

Those suffixes like .com reside in a directory of directories and while there is a central-ness to the directory its power is in its distributed nature!

The international organization that governs this stuff is still largely controlled by the americans who initially agreed to truly make it international but for a whole bunch of reasons (which could take a political turn) that hasn't totally happened.

so, for the next few years we'll have something at the end of a website... like.com or .me or .org or .tv etc... but the limit on that namespace, those suffixes will be expanding as the web expands.

domain name services was a pretty deep and groovy idea and while it isn't perfect... it has held up well.

Magic Bean · June 27th, 2008, 01:11 PM

Registering your own extension costs over $100,000!

Question: currently, the extension doesn't really tell you "where you are". I mean, there are lots of .coms, and none of them are affilliated in any way. Does this carry over into the new system?

Looking at the current system, www.mybank.com, guarantees you are at the official mybank site. But would it be safe to assume that under the new system, www.official.mybank and www.possiblefraud.mybank are both part of the same network? Theoretically, can "Mybank" lease unaffiliated domains under it's .mybank extension? And doesn't that mean we'll end up with a lot of "mybank.mybank" domains just proving authenticity?

I guess my question is, do we still rely on the last 2 words of the domain as proof of location, or just the last word when it is a company name like .mybank?

This is all very confusing from a security point of view.

TDPRI · June 27th, 2008, 01:16 PM

There's a big catch here. Company's will have to pay a hefty price to set up their own domain suffix. Like $100,000 or more.

So, it's not going to be everybody and their brother doing this to begin with. Maybe some day that cost will drop. But initially that's the number I've heard talked about.

getbent · June 27th, 2008, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magic Bean

I guess my question is, do we still rely on the last 2 words of the domain as proof of location, or just the last word when it is a company name like .mybank?

This is all very confusing from a security point of view.

the namespace never offered security nor should it. The veracity of a site is always something that can potentially be hijacked etc.

The reason I think this will be somewhat of a non starter is part of an idea Stephen Jay Gould postulated many years ago about gem paper clips... the current system is 'good enough and even if a new system is 5% better, folks like www at the front (they're used to it) and they like .com (because it is an 'old friend' by now)

my guess in the .mybank concept they'd have branches or functions in the uppermost so it would be sanfrancisco.mybank or something... I kinda think redirects work fine and most people just want what they have come to know and trust (regardless of whether it is the most efficient)

winny pooh · June 27th, 2008, 01:24 PM

The price is a good thing perhaps, think of the fraud that could occur over multiple site names if they were made to resemble banking sites.

Magic Bean · June 27th, 2008, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by getbent

the namespace never offered security nor should it. The veracity of a site is always something that can potentially be hijacked etc.

Point well taken, but for the moment let's ignore fraudulent redirects and dns hijacking and other top-level mischief; we can trust the veracity of abcdefg.com to whatever limited extent because usually the servers are behaving and sending you to the right place. If they are following the rules. Point being we needn't bat an eye when jumping from www1.mybank.com to www2.mybank.com because we know that mybank.com is in control of both, again, barring some major hijacking of the site.

So that's my question, where do we find that same "security" in the new system's rulebook?

ramblinmike · June 27th, 2008, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magic Bean

This is all very confusing from a security point of view.

Agreed. Won't this make it easier for scam artists to get people thinking they are a legitimate website? Maybe not for sophisticated web users like ourselves, but what about the people that lose it all to dethroned Nigerian princes?

-edit- oops forgot to hit the refresh button before I posted

Nighthawk · June 27th, 2008, 02:22 PM

Yeah, I heard this report on NPR this morning. Apparently the whole thing is going to go wide open. They even mentioned the possibility of something like WWW,dot,name,dot,Chinese character, without the commas of course. The idea seems to be to increase the possible number of domains. Could it be that they see an impending shortage? Can you speculate on domains names?

getbent · June 27th, 2008, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magic Bean

o that's my question, where do we find that same "security" in the new system's rulebook?

The same security as exists today (although the word security is not used the way I would use it.)

Consider this: Names resolve to numbers. Whatever the name is is tied to a number or set of numbers (ip addresses) which are assigned to a company. Essentially, traceable... just as it is in today's internet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nighthawk

Yeah, I heard this report on NPR this morning. Apparently the whole thing is going to go wide open. They even mentioned the possibility of something like WWW,dot,name,dot,Chinese character, without the commas of course. The idea seems to be to increase the possible number of domains. Could it be that they see an impending shortage? Can you speculate on domains names?

The internet continues to grow at a huge rate. The impending shortage is not of names but of addresses. The additional names are for the purpose of growing in name recognition and perceived ease of use.

You can speculate on domain names and some folks have made millions cyber squatting on a name... many have been successfully adjudicated that assigned the name without fee to what was ruled to be the correct owner...

June 27th, 2008, 11:51 AM	#2 (permalink)
surfoverb Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Virginia Posts: 1,889	I lived in SFCA during the '.Com Bomb' I think they called it and I remember being in a cafe where at another table were a bunch of 20 something dot commers and the leader was asking them, "Well it's your future WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO?" __________________ "You released the ****** fury!"*

June 27th, 2008, 11:53 AM	#3 (permalink)
aznrambo481 Friend of Leo's Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: La Jolla, California Age: 17 Posts: 2,857 6 Photos	That's odd... what will happen between different countries? Fore example... there's a google.com, google.fr, google.de, google.co.jp... __________________ Check out my bands, and feel free to PM me comments on them! The Eclectics (guitar/vocals) SLIP (bass)

June 27th, 2008, 12:20 PM	#5 (permalink)
Maestro Tele-Holic Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: The United Lowlands Of Holland Posts: 755	the extension is going to become free so Microsoft can call sites microsoft.MS or you get basketball.sport telecaster.fender etc but you'll still need to type in an extension, you'll just get to choose when you buy a website. Though you'll probably have to pay extra to get your own extension. so Paul could give all the forums a .guitar extension. Tele.guitar Strat.guitar etc Televison programs could do this also: Oreillyfactor.fox for example __________________ A clean conscience is usually the result of a bad memory. Last edited by Maestro; June 27th, 2008 at 12:26 PM. Reason: made it a little more clear

June 27th, 2008, 12:30 PM	#6 (permalink)
getbent Moderator Doctor of Teleocity Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: San Benito County, California Posts: 10,024 37 Photos	just because you don't have to use .com doesn't mean we won't be able to. The idea is to open up the namespace to allow for opportunity and growth. they aren't ending one thing and starting another...it is just to provide for growth and flexibility. __________________ 'never pet a burning dog'

June 27th, 2008, 12:59 PM	#8 (permalink)
getbent Moderator Doctor of Teleocity Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: San Benito County, California Posts: 10,024 37 Photos	Yep. with one tiny exception. There is a technical reason for needing, in layman's terms, a suffix of some sort. The whole concept of namespace (.com, .org .something) is to allow end users to utilize text over numbers. it is easier to remember boobalicious.com than 169.247.36.22. So, the concept of a domain or a place to live that has a name was devised. Pretty dang ingenious too! Those suffixes like .com reside in a directory of directories and while there is a central-ness to the directory its power is in its distributed nature! The international organization that governs this stuff is still largely controlled by the americans who initially agreed to truly make it international but for a whole bunch of reasons (which could take a political turn) that hasn't totally happened. so, for the next few years we'll have something at the end of a website... like.com or .me or .org or .tv etc... but the limit on that namespace, those suffixes will be expanding as the web expands. domain name services was a pretty deep and groovy idea and while it isn't perfect... it has held up well. __________________ 'never pet a burning dog'

June 27th, 2008, 01:11 PM	#9 (permalink)
Magic Bean TDPRI Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Ontario Age: 32 Posts: 40	Registering your own extension costs over $100,000! Question: currently, the extension doesn't really tell you "where you are". I mean, there are lots of .coms, and none of them are affilliated in any way. Does this carry over into the new system? Looking at the current system, www.mybank.com, guarantees you are at the official mybank site. But would it be safe to assume that under the new system, www.official.mybank and www.possiblefraud.mybank are both part of the same network? Theoretically, can "Mybank" lease unaffiliated domains under it's .mybank extension? And doesn't that mean we'll end up with a lot of "mybank.mybank" domains just proving authenticity? I guess my question is, do we still rely on the last 2 words of the domain as proof of location, or just the last word when it is a company name like .mybank? This is all very confusing from a security point of view.

June 27th, 2008, 01:16 PM	#10 (permalink)
TDPRI Administrator Poster Extraordinaire Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: TDPRILAND Posts: 5,562 36 Photos	There's a big catch here. Company's will have to pay a hefty price to set up their own domain suffix. Like $100,000 or more. So, it's not going to be everybody and their brother doing this to begin with. Maybe some day that cost will drop. But initially that's the number I've heard talked about.

June 27th, 2008, 01:24 PM	#12 (permalink)
winny pooh Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: South London Posts: 1,612 7 Photos	The price is a good thing perhaps, think of the fraud that could occur over multiple site names if they were made to resemble banking sites. __________________ my afro ambient side project: http://www.myspace.com/theswyambusessions

June 27th, 2008, 02:22 PM	#15 (permalink)
Nighthawk Tele-Meister Join Date: May 2008 Location: Massachusetts Age: 59 Posts: 330	Yeah, I heard this report on NPR this morning. Apparently the whole thing is going to go wide open. They even mentioned the possibility of something like WWW,dot,name,dot,Chinese character, without the commas of course. The idea seems to be to increase the possible number of domains. Could it be that they see an impending shortage? Can you speculate on domains names? __________________ "Inside the museums infinity goes up on trial"