Dawn of a New Internet Era

http://blog.icann.org/2013/10/dawn-of-a-new-internet-era/

by seky • 13 years ago

50 43 13 years ago

blog.icann.org

racbart• 13 years ago

For anyone like me interested in which new gTLDs were introduced but was surprised that their names were not included in the blog post:

شبكة (xn--ngbc5azd) — Arabic for "web/network"

онлайн (xn--80asehdb) — Cyrillic for "online"

сайт (xn--80aswg) — Cyrillic for "site"

游戏 (xn--unup4y) — Chinese for "game(s)"

Source: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20131023_first_new_gtlds_go_li...

ultimatedelman• 13 years ago

yeah, i couldn't believe they were talking about all these new gTLDs and then neglected to mention any of them.

srhngpr• 13 years ago

Thanks for the list. I was trying to find it as well.

Serious question: what would sway one to register and use one of the above extensions compared to what's already out there? Other than localized content, I can't imagine typing شبكة would be simple...

Also, شبكة is also relevant in Farsi (Persian).

dsl2• 13 years ago

I can't imagine typing شبكة would be simple...

It is pretty easy if that is your native keyboard. http://www.foreignlanguagekeyboard.com/images/kbarabic[1].jp...

mikeash• 13 years ago

"Other than localized content...."

I have a hard time comprehending your question. They've added a bunch of non-English TLDs which are clearly for use by non-English sites, but when you ask why someone would use them, you exclude the obvious use-case out of hand.

Aside from communicating with computers and other humans, what would anyone use the internet for?

wiml• 13 years ago

Hmm. On my (US) Mac, switch input method to Arabic, hit af;m and get شبكة . So no harder to type than "info" really if you already have your machine set up to switch between Arabic and Roman/Latin keyboard layouts.

seky• 13 years ago

You're right, thanks for supplying the info

th0br0• 13 years ago

Thanks for the list!

It is somewhat ironic, that none of the registries are in (one of) the language's home countries... most especially given the recent NSA things happening.

wyclif2• 13 years ago

It would be helpful if there were a list of all the new TLDs.

petepete• 13 years ago

Not exactly a 'list', but many of them are here: http://gtld.123-reg.co.uk/

edit: Here's a list: https://gist.github.com/peteryates/7132974

timthimmaiah2• 13 years ago

Looks like an application to apply is $185K, takes 4 months to process, and around a year to get approved. Not including costs for any legal or infrastructure needed to support your gTLD.

dsl2• 13 years ago

Total upfront costs are a little over a million from the applicants I have talked to.

The entire scheme benefits squatters (who register .shoes, .bacon, and 50 others) over legitimate users (who will get only say, .fedex). Once you Spend ~$800k in base costs (registry software, DNS infrastructure, etc), you just tack on an extra $200k for each extra name you want.

icebraining2• 13 years ago

But will the ICANN accept those kinds of TLDs?

timthimmaiah2• 13 years ago

Pretty much the question is: Who is the richest troll ever?

jdmitch• 13 years ago

It’s no accident that the first tranche of gTLDs to be delegated are all non-Latin strings

It's a shame it took so long, but hopefully this will stem the tide of young people who have been pushed towards using their language in transliterated form rather than the original script (I am thinking of Arabic dardasha writing specifically, but I imagine there are other examples)

icebraining2• 13 years ago

There were already TLDs in non-Latin strings. including Arabic. For example, Saudi Arabia has had .السعودية since 2010.

dreen3• 13 years ago

Serious question here, what are the technical limitations in ditching gTLDs and allowing domain names to be any string?

kodablah• 13 years ago

Someone has to have root servers that serve the children of the TLD...where would those be looked up? The closest you could do is assume a TLD (i.e. .com) if it's not typed, but then you harm the non-.com names. It needs to be a tree where roots are controlled.

ryan-c2• 13 years ago

We have this already. All TLDs are under the root domain, ".".

ohashi• 13 years ago

Someone has to maintain a list.

dreen3• 13 years ago

OK so the responses seem to boil down to this. My question is rather why that list cannot live in a globally distributed database inside thousands of DNS servers, everywhere, operated by ISPs and volunteers. Sort of like now but every server would have a near-complete list of all domains that have no syntax or schema.

I guess the infrastructure costs would be higher, but what are other downsides? It definitely wouldn't be possible at the time of creation of DNS, but I can't see why it wouldn't be now.

wmf• 13 years ago

You could start here http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-27ju...

ryan-c2• 13 years ago

gTLDs do allow you to have a domain name that is almost any string - I think the max length is 63 characters after punycode encoding, however it costs a lot of money.

lwf• 13 years ago

"When somebody sends you a message saying 'I'd like a new top-level domain name,' that gets handed to me, and I explain to them why that's a bad idea. Then they pretty much go away and we go on as before."

http://jonpos.tel/

duskwuff2• 13 years ago

How ironic - this message is served on .tel, possibly one of the most useless TLDs implemented.

(Telnic, the registrar for .tel domains, does not permit registrants to change the nameservers, or even DNS. All .tel domains point to a single web server run by Telnic which can only display web pages with contact information.)

headcanon• 13 years ago

Here's hoping for .js sometime soon

colinbartlett2• 13 years ago

I just want .app. There's a zillion web apps, mobile apps, or desktop apps that could use this. And it's very memorable.

creeble• 13 years ago

Not as memorable as .com.

kolev3• 13 years ago

It's a scheme - consumer know ".com" and nothing else. Well, in other countries, their local gTLDs, too, but those new domains are an obvious scheme.

stephen_g• 13 years ago

It's not like regular people type in URLs much anyway, apart for a few sites (Google, Facebook, etc) - these days, pretty much everyone I've seen just googles the name.

I've even seen some adds actually say 'Google [word]' to find them instead of putting a URL, (or worse, 'Search [x] on Facebook!')

lowglow• 13 years ago

[serious] Can we replace the icann?

nilved2• 13 years ago

Good question. gTLDs are an indication of them serving corporations over individuals and that means they're not to be used anyone.

colinbartlett2• 13 years ago

Serious question: What is the detriment to the individual here?

kolev3• 13 years ago

ICANN is a modern day Mafia. This is an extortion scheme to milk more money from corporations. Domains are becoming less and less irrelevant anyway - or at least gTLDs are. I cannot believe that we still tolerate the existence of this corrupt organization! The whole Redemption scheme is just unbelievable! Years pass and nobody does anything to get rid of this domainers-funded mafia!

Dawn of a New Internet Era

Related Stories