Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Networking

New TLDs - Is There Any Real Benefit? 66

Posted by Cliff from the an-ICANN-of-worms dept.
pigdawg writes "What is the purpose? What is the real benefit of new top level domains like .travel, .biz and .xxx? I don't believe these new TLDs will free up more names in .com or .org. Do they really think that orbitz.com will exchange their domain name to become orbitz.travel? Is the mostfrequenttypo.com porn site going to go legit and register under some new .xxx name? Again and again I keep coming to the same conclusion: given that many people/companies register their name in every TLD, it's all about generating more revenue for the registrars. What are your opinions on this subject?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New TLDs - Is There Any Real Benefit? More

New TLDs - Is There Any Real Benefit?

Comments Filter:
  • ...but heck, 'enforce' is a dirty word on the internet.
  • Yes, it is all about generating more revenue for registrars. No, the bulk of real sites will not abandon .com or .org or whatever.

    At best, there will be a few fairly well known sites in the TLD, and a significant chunk of duplication between name.com and name.whatever

    I'm unsure what infirmity of mind would cause one to genuinely believe otherwise.

  • More revenue , more options (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FidelCatsro ( 861135 ) <.fidelcatsro. .at. .gmail.com.> on Friday June 03, 2005 @05:56PM (#12718341) Journal
    Definantly part of the idea was to up revenue , but they also did it to give people more options as to the domain name .
    I dont really see all the scum sites (not that all porn is scum , only the typo sites etc) moving off to the .xxx , but it gives the big names ,well the more honest the chance .

    I dont think there is anything wrong with them trying to drum up revenu ,but it would be nice if they could use that revenue to sort out many of the problems within the organisations
  • Now we have have whitehouse.com,.net,.org,.gov,.xxx,and .biz

    8th grade children will never be able to find the real whitehouse website!

  • BINGO! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by jimpop ( 27817 ) *
    It's all about generating more revenue for the registrars.

    BINGO! It's almost always about generating more revenue, just follow the money. Don't forget that ICANN [icann.org] gets a percentage of every new domain that is registered. This is their effort to raise more funds by FORCING companies to register more domains to protect their web identity (something public companies are legally obligated to do by contract with stockholders)
    • Yeah, like registering even 1,000 different domains (for, say, $10/year) is a significant expense for a public company. They would spend more than that on toilet paper and urinal cookies.

  • Confusing a "registry" with an "index" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bob_Robertson ( 454888 ) on Friday June 03, 2005 @06:19PM (#12718542) Homepage
    Nothing is gained by having many TLD (top level domains). The purpose of a TLD was to denote what registry to look in as a last resort when looking up a domain name that was otherwise not cached in any of the DNS servers querried.

    Way Back When, When The Net Was Small, TLDs were used to distribute the load among the registries. With the advance of technology, there really isn't any functional reason to do so now.

    In the mean time, the registry has been used like an index. Rather than look something up first, a person (machines don't care about DNS, just IP addresses) will type in a likely domain name and hope for the best. It is only after failure that they will go to the indexes like Yahoo and Google and look there for the address just like they would look in the phone book.

    With the political forces already having created the country TLDs, there is no point at all to having, as you put it, "90's style suffixes appended to internet names".

    What is surprising is the number of otherwise smart people who cannot grasp this. Since the DNS system is already difficult for humans to use by itself (eg. coke.com or coke.net or coke.int or coke.org or coke.ny.ny.us) because they are trying to use it like an index rather than a registry, they then advocate adding yet more TLDs. Yet it is the very use of TLDs that has confused the difference between an index and a registry in their minds in the first place, as well as caused the shell-game problem of which TLD to look under first.

    Nothing I'm saying in any way reflects on the usefulness of the hierarchical system that is DNS. It is VERY useful to be able to separate www.whatever.the.heck from mx.whatever.the.heck from www.go.to.heck, etc.etc.etc.heck

    The issue is TLDs, and TLDs have outlived their usefulness. At some point in the future, there will be a .earth appended after the country codes, but I doubt I'll have to worry about that.

    Bob-

    • a person (machines don't care about DNS, just IP addresses) will type in a likely domain name and hope for the best
      I would have to disagree. Seeing not technical people look for something on the interent invariably has them starting with a search engine. I watched my father wanting to look at Ford's website. He opened his browser which loaded to Google by default, and typed in Ford. My wife does similar things. The only time domain names seem to be really important for the average user, is when they

  • Yes, it's true; many companies *do* register every version of their business name they can think of. So what does ABC laundry service do when ABC widgets already has .com, .net and .org? They register .biz or .us. What about ABC travel? They go for .travel. It's not just about freeing up .com and .net domains. It's about more choice as well.

    Yes, I'm certain it will generate more revenue from the many companies who are die-hard brand protectors out there. But there *is* another aspect of this that i

    • By your logic, Microsoft should switch to microsoft.software, safeway.com to safeway.groceries, Sony.com to sony.electronics...

      The problem is that anybody can get a .com for cheap and there isn't enough words in our language to have a unique name for every commercial organization. What I'd prefer is to drop .COM all together in favor of the . system and enforce integration with business license. No, it wouldn't be pretty. People would hate that they can't have yourcompanysucks.com anymore, but then again
      • Perhaps you should read my post again. I didn't say anything about what anyone *should* do. I said "Oh, look: those individuals and organizations who missed their chance now have another one." This is bad because...?

      • there isn't enough words in our language to have a unique name for every commercial organization.

        Really? It seems to me that every state requires that every business have a unique name. If Bob's House of Computers exists, I cannot start a company named Bob's House of Computers, but I can probably start a company named Bob's Computer Store. Perhaps you missed the fact that company names can (and usually do) consist of more than 1 word.

        I too lament the fact that we don't have a more hierarchical doma

        • "I too lament the fact that we don't have a more hierarchical domain system. I.e. we should be able to have computers.apple.com and records.apple.com owned by separate companies."

          No, we should have //com.computers.apple and //com.records.apple. That way the great unwashed might have had a chance at learning that if you wanted to see what the head of the executive branch of the government has to say you start out with .gov and then get more specific and it never crosses your mind to look for com.whitehouse.

      • i've always belived that domain names should be permanent for as long as they are paid up. IE you shouldn't be forced to rename messing up your configurations and others ways of contacting you just on the whim of the registration bodies.
    • And then Disney can sue each of those company's for infringing upon their ABC networks copyright! See, it's not only the registrars who can get more money!

  • Questionable benefit (Score:2, Insightful)

    by JeffHunt ( 129508 )
    I'm not sure what benefit there is in establishing new TLDs. Honestly, I think that the new TLDs, and most of dubious ccTLDs (.sc, .ws, .cx, .cc) are pointless because a domain name that doesn't end in .com, .net, or .org doesn't have much in the way of perceived credibility. ... but that's mostly because I think that any domain name like "foo.info" or "bar.fm" just sounds cheesy. I especially despise the ".biz" TLD because it's just so damned tacky. Imagine "generalmotors.biz" or "phillipmorris.biz". No wa

  • Let's hear it for .biz! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by metamatic ( 202216 ) on Friday June 03, 2005 @06:42PM (#12718745) Homepage Journal
    The .biz TLD has given me an excellent spam heuristic. That alone makes it worthwhile, surely?

  • As others have mention, 'big' businesses will just buy up the new TLD's for their existing domain name, but businesses are not the only proprietors of domain names. For the Average Joe who just wants his own personal space to blog or whatever, having a variety of TLD's to choose from means he can have a shorter, one-word domain name instead of reallyreallylongdomainname.com. However that said, there are already a pretty sizeable number of TLD's to choose from.

    Out of personal preference, I don't like these

  • They're a clue to what the nature of the site is. If it's an .edu you know it's some kind of school. If it's .org it's probably non-profit. If it's .xxx you know it's porno. Same is true for the non-US country codes, .gov, maybe .net.

    If you see a .com it could be anything but is probably not a school or non-profit and is probably US.

    There is absolutely no reason for .biz, .info, etc. Those were stupid ideas which were probably just to get more money for the registrars. Who knows how ICANN makes thes
    • There is absolutely no reason for .biz, .info, etc. Those were stupid ideas which were probably just to get more money for the registrars. Who knows how ICANN makes these decisions...

      Sure there's a good reason for .biz. What if you want to start a business, but the domain you want (in the .com TLD) is taken by either cybersquatters, or another legitimate business (who does not have a worldwide trademark on the name of the business itself). Since there is .biz, you can just use that tld instead of using
      • I don't buy that... What if a 3rd joespoolcleaning comes along? Also the suffix .com has been so embedded in the public consciousness that even if somebody reads joespoolcleaning.biz they will mistype it as .com half the time anyway. Easier to come up with joesextremepoolcleaning.com or something else different.
        • I don't buy that... What if a 3rd joespoolcleaning comes along?

          .us? .info? .net? .org? Or joesextremepoolcleaning.com, I guess.

          Also the suffix .com has been so embedded in the public consciousness that even if somebody reads joespoolcleaning.biz they will mistype it as .com half the time anyway.

          Not sure I buy that one. Yes, .com has been nearly ubiquitous for a long time... but .biz domains are becoming more common, and I've started seeing them on advertising material, etc. I expect that the

      • That doesn't solve the problem, which is this:

        DNS and the web have made all names/trademarks "global" be default. You can't have 27 Acme Cleaners scattered across the nation all with acmecleaners.com/biz/etc. And as others have pointed out, the whole reason for the problem is that people search for the website of a known company by typing acmecleaners.com and hoping it resolves to the "right" acme cleaners; i.e. they use DNS as a search/indexing tool. I've been guilty of this myself, though I've mostly

    • Re:They have some use ... (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      There IS a .tv - only, it's not what you think it is. It's the country specific domain for Tuvalu [wikipedia.org]. Naturally, however, the networks have picked up on this. From the article:

      In 1998, Tuvalu began deriving revenue from use of its area code for "900" lines and from the sale of its ".tv" Internet domain name. In 2000, Tuvalu negotiated a contract leasing its Internet domain name ".tv" for $50 million in royalties over the next dozen years. Royalites from these new technology sources could raise GDP three or
  • Why cant we just type 'yahoo' and 'google'? Many companies will register (eg mysql.org and mysql.com) multiple TLDs to cover their names online, but they wont have to...

    Most people just use .com. Go ahead and register org and net, people will forget and type .com first to get to your site.

    They can sell top level domains except 2-character top-level domains which should remain as country TLDs and the likes...
  • While it won't be easier to catch *every* porn site, it'll be easier parental filters to simply block all of .xxx. Again, not a pancea but an improvement.

    -Bill
    • It won't catch a single porn site that existed before .xxx addresses were available, and will give a false sense of security.

      While we're at it, why not tattoo all of the terrorists we can find with "Terrorist" on their foreheads, so airport security knows which people to stop?

      • Right, as I said, it's not a panacea but it's a step forward.

        I'm not sure I agree with the moral equivalence between pornographers and terrorists. A lot of XXX sites do take steps to keep kids away (as any Fark reader should know ;-). This makes it trivial for for a legit porn-peddler to keep kiddies away.

        -Bill
  • I don't understand why anyone would feel it necessary to register in every TLD. The .com name has been established as the top-tier name (unless you're a nonprofit), and I do think people try "fred.com" first. But the second thing people turn to is much more likely to be a search engine or yellow page site or something like that than a random search through fred.net, fred.biz, fred.cc, fred.tv, etc. etc. And in fact this will be more and more true the more TLDs there are. If you are Kodak and you want to p

  • Agreed... The cat's out of the bag... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bergeron76 ( 176351 ) * on Friday June 03, 2005 @09:27PM (#12719914) Homepage
    The batter has already been mixed; yet ICANN is still trying to separate the mixture into its separate parts.

    It's too late. They've missed the bus. Only suckers will fall for this (they'll still make their money though, so what do they care).

    • Re:Agreed... The cat's out of the bag... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by tverbeek ( 457094 ) on Friday June 03, 2005 @10:47PM (#12720287) Homepage
      Mod parent up.

      Once upon a time when TLDs all had some sort of eligibility requirements (however tacit) and were usually treated as the first branches of a mutually exclusive hierarchy, adding more of them would have been of value. Heck, even .xxx would have made sense if it had existed back in the days before sex.com was registered.

      But the domain name system has become a flat file, already substantially replicated across several TLDs. .xxx will solve no problems whatsoever, will probably introduce a few, and of course will make the registrars and the registry operator some nice cash.

      But I think .cat is the more signficant gTLD to gain ICANN approval in this round, because it indicates that they're open just about anything if there's a technically competent sponsor behind it. If a language/culture can get a gTLD, why don't the Basques, the Chechens, the Tamils, the Palestinians, les Québécois, the Amish, the Yoopers, etc. petition for their own? It won't be long before I'm typing in www.pasty.up to order meat-and-potater pies online.

  • If I'm baking cookies, why can't I just register "cookies"? And then become my own registar and sell the .cookies TLD to others?

    I seriously don't see where there's a technical or sociological merit to the whole .com thing in the first place. I mean, I can see the need for a .gov, but everything else? Most people probably don't even bother typing the suffix in anyway, what with browser guessing...

  • New Top Level Domains Considered Harmful (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mike_sucks ( 55259 ) on Friday June 03, 2005 @10:09PM (#12720125) Homepage
    Tim Berners-Lee and the W3C seems to think they suck [w3.org].

    I tend to agree with them. New TLDs are just a licence to print money. They do not offer new options for domain name holders - everyone with a business or company or product or trademark will just have to go out and get the same permuatations they already own for the existing TLDs and CCs. The name space gets filled up again and people lose out once more. The .mobi domain is harmful for reasons stated in the link above. .xxx is useless because pr0n sites will keep on using other TLDs and CCs. .biz is a ghetto. Can someone explain how a website in .info is more informative than a website in .con? Err... I mean .com?

    Maybe it is just that someone at ICANN is a _big_ fan of Pokemon.

    The DNS hierarchy needs a complete overhaul, not more random, money making and/or harmful branches.

  • I've said it before and I'll say it again, TLDs are stupid. DNS doesn't really give a rats arse about .com, .foo, .etc, whatever. You should be able to register thisismydomain.takeoffeh and it should just simply work.

  • I've been saying for ages that there should be a .xxx TLD, for the simple reason that you can block it really easily, so kids can be kept safer.
    The porn industry is quite organised from what I can see, they could probably be persuaded to move to .xxx en masse and then all the stupid logic based filtering systems can be slashed back to bare bones ;)
    • Pornographic sites don't like to be filtered; they'll do whatever they can to bypass filters. Bypassing filters and reaching unsuspecting audiences is their main source of income.

      They're not organized either; most are greedy individuals who lust after sex and money and take advantage of other people's weaknesses to drag them in. They wouldn't co-operate simply because it will generate less money.

      What really annoys me though are these companies that buy up literally hundreds of thousands of domain names an
      • Porn sites don't like to be filtered? An awful lot of them ask people to confirm they are >18 and provide links to net filtering software for concerned parents. What porn sites don't want is lots of parents screaming about their kids seeing porn everywhere and demanding policitians do something that will hurt the porn industry.

        As for your comments about their level of organisation, you should look into the link/banner exchange programs that run between all the partnerships and organisational groups, not

        • Porn sites don't like to be filtered? An awful lot of them ask people to confirm they are >18 and provide links to net filtering software for concerned parents.

          The age thing is for legal reasons.

          Porn sites want to be filtered away from viewers who will result in legal complications to their operations (such as kids). They want everyone else to see them.

          Ghettoization in .xxx doesn't help them at all, since it will be blocked en masse by corporate firewalls and even entire countries.

          I'm sure yo

          • porn is already blocked en mass by corporate nonsense, but badly and in such a way that it blocks legitimate stuff.
            I know of some huge company firewalls/proxies that won't even let you get to hotornot, that's how much they filter.

            • porn is already blocked en mass by corporate nonsense, but badly and in such a way that it blocks legitimate stuff.

              Right, but that's a state of affairs that suits the porn operators just fine. They have no interest in porn being effectively targeted by corporate filters - that just means less business for them. As long as filters don't work that well, there will be more resistance to using them, as well as more ways around them.

              Anything that makes it easy to block porn - unless it very precisely wo

  • Well, the first thing we are going to do is add a firewall rule to ban all email to and from a .xxx domain and another rule to deny web access.

    It may sound strange but our I.T. systems here are designed for work, not surfing porn.

    Ed Almos
    Budapest, Hungary
  • This article [circleid.com] proposes the reservation of a special use TLD to allow a more convenient addressing of devices by general physical location or context.

    Introduction

    As wireless networking and devices become more common there may be a need for a convenient way to address hosts by physical location or context, especially when the users themselves are using mobile or wearable devices.

    A step towards this could be by reserving a special public use TLD (.here in the examples). Then this TLD can be independently hos
    • The .here TLD has already been reserved by a member of the ORSC. So to avoid conflict another TLD may have to be chosen

      Why would anyone give a rat's ass that someone in the ORSC had laid claim to the domain?

      • Well. Trying to be nice if possible. Not that it matters as I don't have enough leverage to be heard by ICANN - I did email Ms Dyson etc some years back about this, and she did reply, but nothing much happened.

        That said the ORSC's use of .here isn't very much different from .biz or most of the other TLDs they're just "Yet Another Dot Com" - only less popular. So far at least .xxx is something different - even if it's not a perfect solution, I can see how it could be useful.

        My proposal for .here is at leas
  • I am seeing a great potential for a great "web" joke. If you are in charge in an institution that employs content filtering. Block everything but .xxx and see who doesn't complain about the net being down!! Give me 5!
  • Pretty much what you say is the truth...
    Lets face it .com has the primary mindshare if your going to register a domain you'll want .com first. If thats not available maybe .net or .org.
    However its likely that the guy with .com is going to come after you and attempt to shut you down for having a similar name.

    Netsol actively encourages you when you put in a name or even go there to check your record to purchase the same name upder all available TLDs...
  • If there was enforcement of the Generic TLDs [iana.org] -- that is, if only non-profits could register .org; if only commercial enterprises (no fitting in any other category) could register .com; if only network service providers could register .net; if only search engines and brand-agnostic reference sites could register .info; if only porno sites could register .xxx -- such as there is with .gov, .edu, and .mil, then TLDs would actually have meaning.

    As an aside, the .name suffix is for individuals' personal website

Slashdot Top Deals

PURGE COMPLETE.

Close