[HN Gopher] What happens when a ccTLD is retired? Exploring the ...
___________________________________________________________________
What happens when a ccTLD is retired? Exploring the potential risks
of .io
Author : rezamoaiandin
Score : 57 points
Date : 2020-04-16 10:07 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (salt.agency)
(TXT) w3m dump (salt.agency)
| icedchai wrote:
| I doubt .io will disappear. .su is still running decades after
| the fall of the USSR.
| joyj2nd wrote:
| well, fuck.yu became fuck.me
| chrononaut wrote:
| For context .yu was the ccTLD for Yugoslavia, and .me is the
| ccTLD for Montenegro, which is one of the states formerly
| part of Yugoslavia before its dissolution.
| jandrese wrote:
| How many .yu domains were registered when Yugoslavia broke
| up? Back in 1992 most people had never even heard of the
| Internet, especially in politically unstable third world
| countries. You could probably count the number of .yu
| domains registered on your hands.
| reaperducer wrote:
| By virtue of being a former Soviet satellite, .yu was
| second-world, not third-world.
| sherincall wrote:
| The "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia" (FRY) existed until
| 2003, when it was renamed to "Serbia and Montenegro",
| which split into separate countries of "Serbia" and
| "Montenegro" in 2006. "Serbia and Montenegro" was still
| using the .yu ccTLD until 2006.
| dchest wrote:
| .yu was retired in 2010. Still seeing some old outdoor
| ads with it here in Montenegro.
| smilekzs wrote:
| > fuck.me is a
|
| > premium domain name
|
| > ...but it could be yours!
| jml7c5 wrote:
| Aye, any attempt at retirement would quickly result in a new
| '.io' gTLD replacing the '.io' ccTLD. The more reasonable
| concern is not that the ccTLD is retired, but that registration
| rules and/or prices are changed.
| zozbot234 wrote:
| I doubt that .io could become a gTLD, given the established
| practice of using ISO 3166 alpha-2 codes for country-specific
| domain names. A .io gTLD would be dependent on obtaining some
| sort of long-term reservation for IO in ISO 3166 and perhaps
| even in existing standards that extend it, and this is
| unlikely to be granted given how tight the alpha-2 encoding
| space is already.
| reaperducer wrote:
| They could just stop allowing new .io registrations until
| we begin colonizing Jupiter.
| voldacar wrote:
| Does the current TLD system even make sense?
|
| There is a .amazon, a .google, a .cancerresearch, a .sex, a .rich
| (which costs thousands of dollars btw). Plenty of them such as
| .io and .tv are all completely untethered from their original
| meanings/purposes. At this point, a website is just a string with
| a '.' in it somewhere.
|
| Instead of having 1500+ discretely decided upon TLDs why not just
| let people just create their own TLDs as long as they have a
| server to host the DNS?
| edoceo wrote:
| Then https://www.opennic.org is for you! Welcome friend!
| bluedevil2k wrote:
| The .fur domain is ... interesting
| searchableguy wrote:
| .rich seems like a great idea to earn shit ton of money.
| mjayhn wrote:
| Because the lucky few on top of the tld chain are still making
| fortunes. Ironically I see the internet going back to
| keywords/search terms in the future (aol keywords). I hope the
| tld hegemony is eventually a distant memory.
| mmm_grayons wrote:
| Domains really shouldn't be tied to country of origin.
| Conceptually, it doesn't make sense to restrict DNS based on
| geopolitical boundaries. If a foreign company wants to register a
| .us domain, for instance, nothing should stop it.
| im3w1l wrote:
| Imagine if Exoticstan managed all of DNS and their rules
| prohibited websites that your country allowed and even saw as
| culturally important. It's to avoid scenarios like that, that
| having a country specific tld is important. If a country has a
| conflict with whoever manages the DNS root, they could hardcode
| themselves as owning their cctld.
| disiplus wrote:
| the country should manage its own domain. every country has it
| own set of rules, and for me as a citizen of country i would
| not want it to be managed by another country where the thing im
| doing might be illegal but in my own is not. i agree there are
| not many reasons to not being able to buy a domain from another
| country but as is with telephone numbers in alot of countries u
| have to have some residence in a country to get a phone number
| (for example germany) the domain could be like that.
| jandrese wrote:
| So much for the idea of the Internet breaking down political
| boundaries. I know it's been dead for a long time now, but
| there was a thought in the early days that it didn't matter
| where you where or who you are on the Internet, everybody has
| the same access and opportunities.
| reaperducer wrote:
| Why not both?
|
| Countries manage their country-specific domains, and global
| entities manage the rest. The second part is exactly what
| is happening now. We just need to get the first in line.
| wvenable wrote:
| > it doesn't make sense to restrict DNS based on geopolitical
| boundaries.
|
| Sure it does because those geopolitical boundries make sense
| for things like e-commerce. As a Canadian, I know that a site
| having a .ca domain will definitely ship to my address.
| EwanToo wrote:
| I think the .su TLD shows what happens, i.e. not much
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.su
| kspacewalk2 wrote:
| .yu ccTLD shows what else can happen, i.e. domains of ex-
| countries can be killed off.
| MivLives wrote:
| This whole thing kinda makes me nervous for using a .in and
| not being from India.
| [deleted]
| jedberg wrote:
| It seems that there is an easy solution here that is being
| overlooked.
|
| Allow any country to nominate their ccTLD for conversion to gTLD,
| and make that automatic when a country dissolves.
|
| Hold an auction for the gTLD for anyone who qualifies under the
| existing gTLD rules, and the highest bidder gets to run the gTLD.
| The proceeds of the auction go to the country that owned the
| ccTLD.
|
| A lot of small countries would probably gladly put up their
| ccTLDs for auction for the one time cash infusion, and in cases
| like this, if the country does get turned back over, the
| acquiring country would probably be glad to have the money.
|
| This solution seems like an everyone wins scenario. The TLD
| continues to exist and some government gets a small cash
| infusion.
| Aloha wrote:
| This article strikes as blog spam to push this companies domain
| migration service.
| blibble wrote:
| it's too strategic for the UK to want to give up and there's no
| mechanism to force it to do, so there's no particular reason to
| be worried that it will
|
| similarly the linked Guardian article makes a fuss about the UK's
| security council seat, which again, the UK will never give up,
| and again, there's no mechanism to remove it
| scythe wrote:
| More importantly, the whole reason that the UK owns the
| islands, and the reason it evicted the Chagossians, was because
| _the United States wanted them to_. The UK will not lose its
| place on the UNSC for doing the bidding of the US. The UK
| likewise will not give up its territory because they would much
| rather piss off the ICJ than the US. The islands are a UK
| colony only in name; they are a US colony in reality.
|
| I feel bad for the Chagossians. I think they should be
| compensated much better and allowed to return home. But the
| relinquishment of Diego Garcia is not happening, and the
| argument that an archipelago over 2000 kilometers away is an
| "integral part" of Mauritius is clearly motivated reasoning.
| xxpor wrote:
| Given how little care is given to the Marshallese in the US,
| where we literally nuked their islands out of existence, I
| can't imagine anyone's going to care about BIOT any time
| soon.
| FearNotDaniel wrote:
| Let me get this straight... people whose businesses rely on the
| existence of the .io TLD are donating to a campaign group that
| wants the TLD's raison d'etre to be abolished? Smart.
|
| I mean, consider a hypothetical. Let's say there's a whole swathe
| of businesses that have no connection to the American South, but
| for whatever hipster reasons occurred briefly in their
| subculture, all have brand logos that feature the confederate
| flag. At some point, someone points out that this flag represents
| the fight to defend slavery and lots of African-Americans and
| their supporters are still very upset that justice has not been
| done. Do the hipster business owners say to themselves: oh dear,
| I don't like this ugly historical incident that is indicated by a
| significant part of our branding, and neither do my customers
| more to that matter, so I'd better stop using that flag and
| rebrand to something else? Or do they say, actually I think the
| flag is really pretty and it makes my organisation look modern
| and cool, so how about I assuage my guilt by donating to a
| support group that just happens to be also campaigning for the
| abolition of that flag that I want to continue to use?
|
| If you don't think the BIOT should exist, don't stake your
| business on its continuing existence. And good luck invading
| Diego Garcia, it's much more heavily defended than the Falklands
| were.
| samatman wrote:
| Actually, let's not consider that hypothetical.
|
| Let's consider the actual scenario, in which .io and the BIOT
| are thoroughly divorced in the minds of basically everyone.
|
| In that case, someone with a .io domain might well want to
| separate the two-letter string from its problematic origins.
| It's just two letters, after all, and this is the only context
| in which they are associated with the BIOT.
|
| I don't see a movement to abolish stars in heraldry, despite
| their prominent placement in the Confederate flag and the
| association with Communism. That seems more germane.
| FearNotDaniel wrote:
| Well sure, while you're at it let's take .tv away from the
| Government of Tuvalu. It's just two letters right, nobody
| else associates it with that island nation either.
|
| Funnily enough, the same legal reasoning that claims BIOT
| should not exist (dividing a colony before granting
| independence) could also be applied to Tuvalu if you wanted
| to argue that it has no legal right to be a separate state
| independent of Kiribati. The only difference is, Tuvalu's
| separation was in accord with the wishes of its indigenous
| people whereas the Chagos Islanders were shipped elsewhere.
| But then, nobody bothered asking the indigenous peoples of
| the USA how they felt about a new nation being founded on
| their land, and we all seem to tolerate the existence of that
| somewhat irritating country.
| qeternity wrote:
| Tell that to the .ly's
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-04-17 23:00 UTC)