What's the cheapest domain you can register for 10 years?(shkspr.mobi)
shkspr.mobi
What's the cheapest domain you can register for 10 years?
https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2022/09/whats-the-cheapest-domain-you-can-register-for-10-years/
275 comments
> I worked in the domain name industry for 4 years.
More than 10 years here. I agree with you, except I would go further and simply recommend against any other weird gTLDs at all. Stick with your national ccTLD unless it is managed by utter incompetents, in which case you have fallbacks like .eu for EU nationals, and .com, .net, .org and .info for the rest.
Going back to the original question, .info seems cheapest of the reasonable TLDs (when registering for 10 years).
More than 10 years here. I agree with you, except I would go further and simply recommend against any other weird gTLDs at all. Stick with your national ccTLD unless it is managed by utter incompetents, in which case you have fallbacks like .eu for EU nationals, and .com, .net, .org and .info for the rest.
Going back to the original question, .info seems cheapest of the reasonable TLDs (when registering for 10 years).
> Stick with your national ccTLD unless it is managed by utter incompetents, in which case you have fallbacks like .eu for EU nationals, and .com, .net, .org and .info for the rest.
Disregarding the price factor for a moment, would you still prioritize "your own country's ccTLD" over .com, when registering web presence for a company with no particular local presence in its home country? I.e. should a Canadian-based company that mostly serves the US still prefer .ca to .com?
For that matter, does your advice apply to .us?
Disregarding the price factor for a moment, would you still prioritize "your own country's ccTLD" over .com, when registering web presence for a company with no particular local presence in its home country? I.e. should a Canadian-based company that mostly serves the US still prefer .ca to .com?
For that matter, does your advice apply to .us?
> would you still prioritize "your own country's ccTLD" over .com, when registering web presence for a company with no particular local presence in its home country?
1. Yes. It’s also a matter of marketing, of course, where the desire to have a .com might trump all other consideration.
2. If a company has no particular local presence in it’s home country, what would the concept of “home” country even mean?
The reason to prefer your own local ccTLD is to have an easier time dealing with any disputes or questions from your TLD registry. I.e. would the registry assume that they can simply contact you (and speak the local language) if anything should arise, then you will have an easier time dealing with that. If you were to be technically registered somewhere, but have no local people and no local presence, or even if your company merely seems to be of foreign origin, the TLD registry (and legal officials in general) might not deal with you very favorably.
1. Yes. It’s also a matter of marketing, of course, where the desire to have a .com might trump all other consideration.
2. If a company has no particular local presence in it’s home country, what would the concept of “home” country even mean?
The reason to prefer your own local ccTLD is to have an easier time dealing with any disputes or questions from your TLD registry. I.e. would the registry assume that they can simply contact you (and speak the local language) if anything should arise, then you will have an easier time dealing with that. If you were to be technically registered somewhere, but have no local people and no local presence, or even if your company merely seems to be of foreign origin, the TLD registry (and legal officials in general) might not deal with you very favorably.
By "local presence" I meant "markets itself to customers in that country." Especially in the digital age, a company can be "homed" in one country — have all its offices and employees there — but make a product/service that is only marketed (or even legal!) in another country.
First example that comes to mind: many of those shady crypto companies that did "ICOs" in 2017, were based in the US; but the US has regulations that block non-accredited US customers from investing in things like this. So these companies generally just ignored the US market — even blocking US visitors on their website — and instead marketed to people in every other country.
First example that comes to mind: many of those shady crypto companies that did "ICOs" in 2017, were based in the US; but the US has regulations that block non-accredited US customers from investing in things like this. So these companies generally just ignored the US market — even blocking US visitors on their website — and instead marketed to people in every other country.
> should a Canadian-based company that mostly serves the US still prefer .ca to .com?
In this case it doesn't matter in terms of reliability. If you target the US, maybe go with .com, unless .ca brings something (if it's a pun, or if you want to highlight the fact you're a Canadian company).
Also consider the fact that the country's ccTLD is not popular in every country. In France the .fr is very popular for example, but it's not the case everywhere. I'm not sure the .us is very popular in the us for example, is it?
In this case it doesn't matter in terms of reliability. If you target the US, maybe go with .com, unless .ca brings something (if it's a pun, or if you want to highlight the fact you're a Canadian company).
Also consider the fact that the country's ccTLD is not popular in every country. In France the .fr is very popular for example, but it's not the case everywhere. I'm not sure the .us is very popular in the us for example, is it?
I don’t believe .us is very popular.
It's not. Also, WHOIS privacy is banned for .us domains, unlike .com domains.
> I would go further and simply recommend against any other weird gTLDs at all.
To be honest you're probably right, but considering it can be hard to find a good .com nowadays, I think going for a somewhat well managed newGTLD is a good option.
HOWEVER, doing the work of knowing which registry is reliable can be a bit hard when you're not in the industry yourself.
To be honest you're probably right, but considering it can be hard to find a good .com nowadays, I think going for a somewhat well managed newGTLD is a good option.
HOWEVER, doing the work of knowing which registry is reliable can be a bit hard when you're not in the industry yourself.
5ish years, here (though out of the industry for a bit). Why do you recommend against the new gTLDs?
1. The new gTLDs come and go, and sometimes even change ownership, AFAIK.
2. The rules can change somewhat arbitrarily. Or the rules might not change, but their enforcement might.
3. The registries have no incentive to treat their TLD management as a stewardship of a public good; they are in it for the money, and might de-prioritize technical development and/or support to arbitrarily low levels.
2. The rules can change somewhat arbitrarily. Or the rules might not change, but their enforcement might.
3. The registries have no incentive to treat their TLD management as a stewardship of a public good; they are in it for the money, and might de-prioritize technical development and/or support to arbitrarily low levels.
Running 10 gTLDs is about as hard as running 1 TLD. You already have the nameservers and the servers that handle registering domains, etc. Most of the rest of the work is done by registrars.
Further, TLDs are bought and sold periodically. I haven't seen any gTLDs go away. Is that something you've seen?
Otherwise, the concerns listed seem like FUD with no evidence so far.
Further, TLDs are bought and sold periodically. I haven't seen any gTLDs go away. Is that something you've seen?
Otherwise, the concerns listed seem like FUD with no evidence so far.
I got stuck in a which domain to buy flip-flop recently.
.info feels like the most benign above.
But when I read them out, www and .com just feel like some relic from yester-year. But we have gotten used to them to the point we don't necessarily notice.
.info feels like the most benign above.
But when I read them out, www and .com just feel like some relic from yester-year. But we have gotten used to them to the point we don't necessarily notice.
> If it’s a ccTLD (2 characters) not of your own country, don’t take it. Eligibility rules routinely change and you could get kicked out overnight. UK residents lost eligibility to .eu with Brexit for instance.
But British people were in the EU when they bought their domains. More generally, even if you pick a ccTLD of a country that you live in, how are you supposed to predict whether your specific area will split off and become a separate country?
I think ideally in those cases the people running the Internet infrastructure should be compassionate rather than spiteful, and just let you keep your old domain even if they won't let you register new ones. But that's obviously not what happens.
But British people were in the EU when they bought their domains. More generally, even if you pick a ccTLD of a country that you live in, how are you supposed to predict whether your specific area will split off and become a separate country?
I think ideally in those cases the people running the Internet infrastructure should be compassionate rather than spiteful, and just let you keep your old domain even if they won't let you register new ones. But that's obviously not what happens.
The EU was spiteful in this case, but that was expected. To be fair, they gave British registrants at least 1 year of grace period to migrate their domains to a new TLD, it didn’t happen overnight in this case.
The EU was not being spiteful in the slightest. .EU domains are intended for entities within the EEA. When the UK left, UK-based entities no long had that entitlement, unless you believe you that the UK as a third country deserves to be treated differently from every other one.
A year's grace was pretty generous, and has the domains been transferred to an EEA-based entity (such as a subsidiary based in the EEA or an EEA-based proxy, which is a service some .EU registrars provide), then they could keep them.
A year's grace was pretty generous, and has the domains been transferred to an EEA-based entity (such as a subsidiary based in the EEA or an EEA-based proxy, which is a service some .EU registrars provide), then they could keep them.
A domain name is intended to represent something. It shows up in identifiers and addresses such as the Uniform Resource Locator and email addresses. It's better for basically-everyone-in-the-world if that representation and those addresses have a measure of stability.
If it's not actively "spiteful" to impair stability, when the only cost is an ever-so-modest impact to brand purity, then at the very least it's a short-sighted way to cause a deadweight economic loss to humanity.
I guess that's just what rule-by-bureaucracy does, though, including EU bureaucracy: every day, they make decisions that affect people, always bringing the greatest possible reverence for the rules, and paying as little regard as possible to the price of the consequences of their decisions, which are fundamentally someone else's problem.
If it's not actively "spiteful" to impair stability, when the only cost is an ever-so-modest impact to brand purity, then at the very least it's a short-sighted way to cause a deadweight economic loss to humanity.
I guess that's just what rule-by-bureaucracy does, though, including EU bureaucracy: every day, they make decisions that affect people, always bringing the greatest possible reverence for the rules, and paying as little regard as possible to the price of the consequences of their decisions, which are fundamentally someone else's problem.
You still don't get what Brexit exactly is, it looks like. It was a one sided drastic withdrawal from any and all EU institutions, and yes, that includes the TLD.
Amazing how you would think that your particular field of work would be excepted.
Amazing how you would think that your particular field of work would be excepted.
What about a UK person who voted "no" to Brexit and who might have been a proud holder of their personal .eu domain for a dozen years?
I guess the point is that one should only go with commercial domain names, and never with political ones (which all country code TLDs are by definition).
I guess the point is that one should only go with commercial domain names, and never with political ones (which all country code TLDs are by definition).
> What about a UK person who voted "no"
The nature of democracy is that you don't always get your way.
Barnier kept the door open for all kinds of intermediate levels of association, but the British delegation kept saying no and pushing for hard Brexit. Well, that's what they got.
The nature of democracy is that you don't always get your way.
Barnier kept the door open for all kinds of intermediate levels of association, but the British delegation kept saying no and pushing for hard Brexit. Well, that's what they got.
> it was a one sided drastic withdrawal
a couple of opinionated words there that you didn't support.
drastic for sure is false as it took quite awhile to go through, much longer than the merger in fact.
For my opinionated sentence I will say... Britain is better off, the EU is an abomination.
a couple of opinionated words there that you didn't support.
drastic for sure is false as it took quite awhile to go through, much longer than the merger in fact.
For my opinionated sentence I will say... Britain is better off, the EU is an abomination.
I don't think there are any opinionated words there.
The definition of 'drastic' does not necessarily mean quick (although it can). Definitions of drastic include (collected variously from Oxford, Cambridge, and Merriam-Webster dictionaries): 'having very noticeable effects', 'likely to have a strong or far-reaching effect', and 'extreme in effect [...]'.
I think Brexit fits this definition.
With regards to your opinionated sentence, you are entitled to your opinion that the EU is an 'abomination', although it is just an opinion without any support, and it's provably incorrect that Britain 'IS' better off (although an argument can be made that the potential long term benefits of Brexit may outweigh the current short term negative impact, it's far from being certain, and definitely should not be discussed in the present tense).
The definition of 'drastic' does not necessarily mean quick (although it can). Definitions of drastic include (collected variously from Oxford, Cambridge, and Merriam-Webster dictionaries): 'having very noticeable effects', 'likely to have a strong or far-reaching effect', and 'extreme in effect [...]'.
I think Brexit fits this definition.
With regards to your opinionated sentence, you are entitled to your opinion that the EU is an 'abomination', although it is just an opinion without any support, and it's provably incorrect that Britain 'IS' better off (although an argument can be made that the potential long term benefits of Brexit may outweigh the current short term negative impact, it's far from being certain, and definitely should not be discussed in the present tense).
Think of it as like a visa. If your visa runs out, you no longer have the right to be in the country you're in, and you need to leave. You don't have to go home - you can go to another country with different requirements - but you can't stay.
The UK government fucked everyone over with Brexit, largely because they didn't care to think about the consequences.
The UK government fucked everyone over with Brexit, largely because they didn't care to think about the consequences.
> Think of it as like a visa.
Yes! A visa! Thank you! The strident heart and soul of the inhuman, inhumane, soulless bureaucracy. It is exactly like that.
This isn't exactly something to be lauded or celebrated! Have you ever dealt with having a visa? Have you ever been impacted by the uncertainty and confusion of the nation you are living in, changing its rules about your visa? Do you have any concept at all of the economic and the humanitarian impact of the bureaucracy's machinations around and involving visas? Even aside from the worst of that, have you ever abandoned a job and friends and the life you were trying to build somewhere, because someone changed the rules about visas? I liked that job, sir.
Oh, let me tell you about visas! I will tell you about them all day long. But, ah — I think it was a more flattering to the decision-makers when we were just talking about the cost of broken URLs and email addresses.
Yes! A visa! Thank you! The strident heart and soul of the inhuman, inhumane, soulless bureaucracy. It is exactly like that.
This isn't exactly something to be lauded or celebrated! Have you ever dealt with having a visa? Have you ever been impacted by the uncertainty and confusion of the nation you are living in, changing its rules about your visa? Do you have any concept at all of the economic and the humanitarian impact of the bureaucracy's machinations around and involving visas? Even aside from the worst of that, have you ever abandoned a job and friends and the life you were trying to build somewhere, because someone changed the rules about visas? I liked that job, sir.
Oh, let me tell you about visas! I will tell you about them all day long. But, ah — I think it was a more flattering to the decision-makers when we were just talking about the cost of broken URLs and email addresses.
Should one live in a high tax high social safety net country while paying tax to a low tax low social safety net country or not paying tax at all? I’d argue visas have real value in helping to manage that problem, and are, therefore, neither inhuman nor inhumane.
And then yes, like visa recognition agreements, if your country withdraws from a visa accord or economic region, the host country has no obligation to keep you credentialed, or domained. If unhappy about such thing, a more effective path is to activate compatriots against the withdrawal, rather than fuss at the host zone.
And then yes, like visa recognition agreements, if your country withdraws from a visa accord or economic region, the host country has no obligation to keep you credentialed, or domained. If unhappy about such thing, a more effective path is to activate compatriots against the withdrawal, rather than fuss at the host zone.
> Should one live in a high tax high social safety net country while paying tax to a low tax low social safety net country or not paying tax at all?
My friend, if these systems were just about aligning the incentives for workers and benefits and taxes, and otherwise tried to be understanding about human foibles, then people wouldn't point to immigration systems around the world as a Kafkaesque nightmare.
Just to pick an example — chosen for my familiarity, wholly outside of and unrelated to Brexit — the UK's Windrush scandal involved the bureaucracy actively destroying old records of immigration from British overseas possessions (particularly the Caribbean), then deciding years later to go after people who had been living in the country for decades — demanding they supply exhaustive documentation of their legal immigration, and their life and activities in the intervening time. Rest assured that this was a fully adversarial process! They did not offer to help anyone so affected gather these documents, or to make their case.
And later, in another unrelated scandal, the Home Office decided to react to an English-examination cheating scandal by analyzing everyone's examination results with some opaque computerized process, using the results to declare something like 97% of them as invalid cheaters — and sending nastygrams to about 9,700 university students, calling them dirty cheaters and demanding they leave country. Many of them did, and they forcibly removed others. Notably, they did not ask for them to re-sit the exam. They did not care about the lives ruined.
Of course the matter of the .eu domain is absolutely nothing compared to the daily nightmare that is "visas," but the same devotion to rules and insensitivity to the costs of policy runs through the matter. They could have grandfathered in existing domains, at least a little bit longer. I know that if I had a website and I had to move domains, I would want to run web and email forwarding for more than one year. If they wanted to be particular about just having the forwarding, they could have audited the sites to make sure that they were just redirects, and charged for the privilege. They didn't. There's no sane reason that couldn't happen except to preserve The Rules — but these rules simply are not a valuable end in and of themselves, despite the laud and honor they have received in this thread.
My friend, if these systems were just about aligning the incentives for workers and benefits and taxes, and otherwise tried to be understanding about human foibles, then people wouldn't point to immigration systems around the world as a Kafkaesque nightmare.
Just to pick an example — chosen for my familiarity, wholly outside of and unrelated to Brexit — the UK's Windrush scandal involved the bureaucracy actively destroying old records of immigration from British overseas possessions (particularly the Caribbean), then deciding years later to go after people who had been living in the country for decades — demanding they supply exhaustive documentation of their legal immigration, and their life and activities in the intervening time. Rest assured that this was a fully adversarial process! They did not offer to help anyone so affected gather these documents, or to make their case.
And later, in another unrelated scandal, the Home Office decided to react to an English-examination cheating scandal by analyzing everyone's examination results with some opaque computerized process, using the results to declare something like 97% of them as invalid cheaters — and sending nastygrams to about 9,700 university students, calling them dirty cheaters and demanding they leave country. Many of them did, and they forcibly removed others. Notably, they did not ask for them to re-sit the exam. They did not care about the lives ruined.
Of course the matter of the .eu domain is absolutely nothing compared to the daily nightmare that is "visas," but the same devotion to rules and insensitivity to the costs of policy runs through the matter. They could have grandfathered in existing domains, at least a little bit longer. I know that if I had a website and I had to move domains, I would want to run web and email forwarding for more than one year. If they wanted to be particular about just having the forwarding, they could have audited the sites to make sure that they were just redirects, and charged for the privilege. They didn't. There's no sane reason that couldn't happen except to preserve The Rules — but these rules simply are not a valuable end in and of themselves, despite the laud and honor they have received in this thread.
The Britisch delegation insisted on a hard Brexit time after time. It's what they got. Just like how EU residents who move outside of the EU lose the right to a .EU, the Brits did too.
Aaaaand we're back to the "serves-them-right" lowkey spiteful angle. I don't know, if I were a member in good standing of some Institution(TM) that is supposed to look out for me and work for my interests, and my government decided one day to throw me under the bus, I'd prefer the Institution(TM) didn't try its utmost to pitch in and throw me under the bus too. I hope you never face a similar problem in your life.
The eligibity rules to be a member of the institutions existed before Brexit.
Funny how applying the eligibility the rules to you as they do to everyone else in the world who is not a member of the EU is seen as spiteful by you.
Funny how applying the eligibility the rules to you as they do to everyone else in the world who is not a member of the EU is seen as spiteful by you.
It's not spiteful serves them right, it is what hard Brexit means, what was asked for.
I've once been denied a visitor visa for having "insufficient funds to support myself during my stay" (in Flemish, for the FOSDEM weekend) even though I submitted my bank statement with upwards of 10k EUR of holdings, my company supporting letter claiming to be paying for the entire trip, paid-for flight tickets and hotel booking, etc. I already had like a dozen visas for other Schengen/EU countries in my passport (all for short stays, because that's how they roll — I kept changing my passports because I kept running out of pages for the EU visas in them).
Visas are an imperfect tool for whatever they are designed to do, and any sufficiently advanced bureaucracy will develop ways to misuse such a gift.
They are a complete mess, especially so from the EU countries. US and UK have been more reasonable (no hard requirements of what documentation is needed, as long as you can prove that you are travelling with an actual purpose, and once granted, it's for at least 6 months for UK or 3 years in case of the US), but luckily we've entered the Schengen whitelist since.
Visas are an imperfect tool for whatever they are designed to do, and any sufficiently advanced bureaucracy will develop ways to misuse such a gift.
They are a complete mess, especially so from the EU countries. US and UK have been more reasonable (no hard requirements of what documentation is needed, as long as you can prove that you are travelling with an actual purpose, and once granted, it's for at least 6 months for UK or 3 years in case of the US), but luckily we've entered the Schengen whitelist since.
> Yes! A visa! Thank you! The strident heart and soul of the inhuman, inhumane, soulless bureaucracy. It is exactly like that.
Ah yes. Because the UK isn't planning on sending refugees in Rwanda. /s
Ah yes. Because the UK isn't planning on sending refugees in Rwanda. /s
No, you left the club. Once you leave the club, you're not entitled to the benefits.
You're expecting the UK to be treated specially.
You're expecting the UK to be treated specially.
My previous employer was similarly spiteful, when I quit they stopped paying my wages. Totally unreasonable and out of absolutely nowhere, they didnt even warn me, just refused to deposit the paycheques into my account every month. Not even a year grace period or anything.
> The EU was spiteful in this case
That logic defies description. If you are not a member of a certain country or economic zone, you cannot get and keep that zone's exclusive domains. Thats law. What you are saying is that the Eu should have made an exception for the Brits and allowed them to keep doing what others are not allowed. That sounds like too much exceptionalist entitlement.
That logic defies description. If you are not a member of a certain country or economic zone, you cannot get and keep that zone's exclusive domains. Thats law. What you are saying is that the Eu should have made an exception for the Brits and allowed them to keep doing what others are not allowed. That sounds like too much exceptionalist entitlement.
This is similar to Norway rules. By the law only legal entities registered in Norway can have .no domain. If an organization cease to exist or stops to have a legal presence in the country then the domain must be returned within one year.
Not that that changes anything; everybody who wants to register a .no domain simply hires a local proxy to “own” the domain for them. Most registrars offers this as a service, and as an end customer you don’t have to know anything about it.
That’s not law. It might be how the EU manages their own ccTLD, and there may be an EU rule for it, but it isn’t a transnational law. For example:
In 2010, nearly 10% of the revenue of the Government of Tuvalu came from royalties from .tv addresses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.tv
In 2010, nearly 10% of the revenue of the Government of Tuvalu came from royalties from .tv addresses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.tv
They’re not wrong in saying that that’s the law. Maybe as you say it’s not law in traditional sense but the requirements are quite clear.
> You may register a .eu, .ею or .ευ domain name if you fulfil the following criteria:
> You represent an organisation established in one of the European Union Member States; or Iceland, Liechtenstein or Norway. You are an individual residing in one of the European Union Member States, Iceland, Liechtenstein, or Norway, or a citizen of one of the European Union Member States, Iceland, Liechtenstein, or Norway (as of 2 August 2021).
> You may register a .eu, .ею or .ευ domain name if you fulfil the following criteria:
> You represent an organisation established in one of the European Union Member States; or Iceland, Liechtenstein or Norway. You are an individual residing in one of the European Union Member States, Iceland, Liechtenstein, or Norway, or a citizen of one of the European Union Member States, Iceland, Liechtenstein, or Norway (as of 2 August 2021).
It's EU law, which by definition makes it 'transnational' law.
There's nothing which requires the EU to impose that law, but it is law nevertheless.
There's nothing which requires the EU to impose that law, but it is law nevertheless.
I apologize if my comment was pedantic as we don't disagree. The parent quote is "If you are not a member of a certain country or economic zone, you cannot get and keep that zone's exclusive domains. Thats law." While the context is the EU, the parent made a claim larger than the EU, which is not correct.
It would be different if the parent had written "If you are not a member of the EU. . ." but that was not what was written.
Likewise, an EU law that governs only EU assets isn't transnational. For example, Poland doesn't have eligibility criteria [0] but French ccTLDs like .pm do [1]. As I read the restriction text I detect a touch of the spite referred to elsewhere as it has exceptions for other non-EU-member European countries: "Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein"
0. https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/cctld/pl/index.html
1. https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/cctld/pm/index.html
It would be different if the parent had written "If you are not a member of the EU. . ." but that was not what was written.
Likewise, an EU law that governs only EU assets isn't transnational. For example, Poland doesn't have eligibility criteria [0] but French ccTLDs like .pm do [1]. As I read the restriction text I detect a touch of the spite referred to elsewhere as it has exceptions for other non-EU-member European countries: "Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein"
0. https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/cctld/pl/index.html
1. https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/cctld/pm/index.html
Those are the single market countries, it’s not unusual to see those four as exceptions, but I take your point, OP could have been more precise.
If there is an Eu rule for something, its the Eu law. Regulations work like that.
.EU domains were always restricted to entities in the EEA.
I don't know how useful that is in practise, but it's not the only CCTLD with this restriction.
I don't know how useful that is in practise, but it's not the only CCTLD with this restriction.
There was no spite in it - or at least if there were any spite in it, the UK was party to it when the legislation was originally written back in 2002 - when the UK was a member state, and Brexit was not even a whisper.
The UK helped to implement the following regulations on who can register for a .eu TLD at that time:
(i) undertaking having its registered office, central administration or principal place of business within the Community, or
(ii) organisation established within the Community without prejudice to the application of national law, or
(iii) natural person resident within the Community;
(Regulation (EC) No 733/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Article 4 (2) (b))
There were some amendments in 2019, but the meaning is broadly the same as the original draft (at least in this context). The key relevant change is the addition an entitlement for EU citizens who are not resident in the EU (e.g.: those who live in the UK).
The UK helped to implement the following regulations on who can register for a .eu TLD at that time:
(i) undertaking having its registered office, central administration or principal place of business within the Community, or
(ii) organisation established within the Community without prejudice to the application of national law, or
(iii) natural person resident within the Community;
(Regulation (EC) No 733/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Article 4 (2) (b))
There were some amendments in 2019, but the meaning is broadly the same as the original draft (at least in this context). The key relevant change is the addition an entitlement for EU citizens who are not resident in the EU (e.g.: those who live in the UK).
Lets see what will happen to Scottish .uk domains when they leave.
Yes learned this the hard way with 3d.st . The operators of the .st domain were somehow affected by "force majeure" timed coincidentally around new sanctions on Russia. Essentially the country-approved TLD operator no longer responded to support requests for months. We switched to .org instead
> If it’s a ccTLD (2 characters) not of your own country, don’t take it. Eligibility rules routinely change and you could get kicked out overnight.
One of my domains uses the .ch TLD, from Switzerland, I use it for many account registrations via email. Should I be worried that I will lose access and proactively migrate away from this domain?
One of my domains uses the .ch TLD, from Switzerland, I use it for many account registrations via email. Should I be worried that I will lose access and proactively migrate away from this domain?
It depends on the criticity of your domain. Although it's unlikely to happen, Switzerland could decide on a whim to restrict access to .ch to Swiss residents or nationals. My guess is it's very unlikely with Switzerland but who knows? You can judge on the likeliness of that for yourself and act on it accordingly.
Realistically I think you're fine sticking with .ch, but consider one of the original gTLDs for future use (com, net, info, org)
Realistically I think you're fine sticking with .ch, but consider one of the original gTLDs for future use (com, net, info, org)
Do they still have the “in case of problems, you might be asked to supply a local postal address for communication” sort of thing that got introduced a bit over a decade ago? (I forget the details and am not in a position to recheck right now.)
.ch is owned by a foundation called “SWITCH”.
If you trust them, it’s fine. I would guess they’ll be around for a while.
https://www.switch.ch/about/foundation/
If you trust them, it’s fine. I would guess they’ll be around for a while.
https://www.switch.ch/about/foundation/
> .ch is owned by a foundation called “SWITCH”.
That's not entirely true. What happens for ccTLDs is that they're owned by the government, and administrative and technical management of the extension is delegated to a foundation/association. In the example of France (I'm French so I know it best), the .fr has been managed by the Afnic historically, but it's renewed every few years (5 I think?) by the government. Last time was 2021.
In the case of ccTLDs you need to trust the associated government no matter what, more than the delegated registry.
That's not entirely true. What happens for ccTLDs is that they're owned by the government, and administrative and technical management of the extension is delegated to a foundation/association. In the example of France (I'm French so I know it best), the .fr has been managed by the Afnic historically, but it's renewed every few years (5 I think?) by the government. Last time was 2021.
In the case of ccTLDs you need to trust the associated government no matter what, more than the delegated registry.
Yes, good point.
I went with a .net domain and am so happy to see this insight.
.net might be a bit less sexy than .com but both are managed by Verisign, which is probably the most reliable registry nowadays. They both suffer from the same price increases for the wrong reasons, but you get the peace of mind IMO. Good choice!
And it is one of the legacy tlds. Even if the entities managing them go down, someone will likely take over with same rules.
> I would only buy a gTLD managed by Google
Google? Who has a grotesque history of shutting stuff down on people's faces because a collection of execs decided so?
Google? Who has a grotesque history of shutting stuff down on people's faces because a collection of execs decided so?
They have to follow ICANN rules for registry operators, just like everyone else. Google can't simply shut down their registry operations: management would be moved to another registry operator.
Isn’t this analogous to the problem where control of governments change, and the new registry operator can have arbitrarily bad rules / prices?
I gave a relevant answer here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32799919
Google Registry is not just any user facing product they can shutdown whenever they want. I have no issue renting a .app or a .dev, but I'd never use Google Domains for that.
Google Registry is not just any user facing product they can shutdown whenever they want. I have no issue renting a .app or a .dev, but I'd never use Google Domains for that.
> I worked in the domain name industry for 4 years. Be careful which TLD you rent (you never buy it).
Speaking specifically about .com/org/net/info I would not use either the word 'rent' or 'own' strictly but defacto you own the domain if you continue to pay the really nominal fees every year for renewal with the registrar you choose. That is an entire topic in itself because different registrars have different policies subject to (again for those tld's) ICANN rules.
As such you 'own' the rights to the domain name (same as google, amazon, tesla etc) in the sense that you can sell those rights to someone else if you want or transfer them.
You can think of domain ownership similar to physical real estate where there are property taxes you pay. There are a limited set of circumstances where you can lose the property (don't pay property tax, eminent domain etc) but you don't think you are renting (other than if you are renting).
Now for other things you own there is no annual fee you pay.
Speaking specifically about .com/org/net/info I would not use either the word 'rent' or 'own' strictly but defacto you own the domain if you continue to pay the really nominal fees every year for renewal with the registrar you choose. That is an entire topic in itself because different registrars have different policies subject to (again for those tld's) ICANN rules.
As such you 'own' the rights to the domain name (same as google, amazon, tesla etc) in the sense that you can sell those rights to someone else if you want or transfer them.
You can think of domain ownership similar to physical real estate where there are property taxes you pay. There are a limited set of circumstances where you can lose the property (don't pay property tax, eminent domain etc) but you don't think you are renting (other than if you are renting).
Now for other things you own there is no annual fee you pay.
I found a pretty good .com a few years ago and this is basically the conclusion I came to when I was trying to decide which matching TLDs to register and which ones are safe to use.
I’m from Canada, so I used the ccTLD for all of my non-public stuff. CIRA seems to be well run.
I was really frustrated by the trendy TLDs, especially the ccTLDs. I felt like I had to register those because anyone willing to use (ex:) .io probably has a high enough risk tolerance they’ll use the name without even considering existing trademarks, etc.. The .io and .co domains are the most frustrating because they’re more expensive than the others.
So I would say relying on .com, .net, and your ccTLD is great advice in terms of TLDs to use, but don’t hesitate to register some of the trendier ones for brand protection because it’s the cheapest thing you can do to discourage others from using the same name.
I’m from Canada, so I used the ccTLD for all of my non-public stuff. CIRA seems to be well run.
I was really frustrated by the trendy TLDs, especially the ccTLDs. I felt like I had to register those because anyone willing to use (ex:) .io probably has a high enough risk tolerance they’ll use the name without even considering existing trademarks, etc.. The .io and .co domains are the most frustrating because they’re more expensive than the others.
So I would say relying on .com, .net, and your ccTLD is great advice in terms of TLDs to use, but don’t hesitate to register some of the trendier ones for brand protection because it’s the cheapest thing you can do to discourage others from using the same name.
[deleted]
I was considering registering another domain for my internal services (I already own a .com domain) but I might end up use it as a public domain, not sure yet. The .one TLD came up in the list of cheap TLDs but I'm not sure if I should consider it. I've heard some email providers simply block the new gTLDs.
I rent .space domain and use it for my email. Can please tell what could go wrong with it?
.space is managed by Radix, one of the entities I would consider reliable enough for a newGTLD.
For weird newGTLD the worst that can happen is the registry goes bankrupt and their TLDs are not saved by the ICANN or bought by another registry. In this case you'd lose the domain. IMO it's unlikely to happen to Radix.
For weird newGTLD the worst that can happen is the registry goes bankrupt and their TLDs are not saved by the ICANN or bought by another registry. In this case you'd lose the domain. IMO it's unlikely to happen to Radix.
> If it’s free, it’s a bad deal, just don’t take it.
Can you speak more to this? I am using a free domain for my GitHub pages site. This is not an e-commerce site, it’s just some notes and random stuff. Are there any downsides to using a free domain in my case?
Can you speak more to this? I am using a free domain for my GitHub pages site. This is not an e-commerce site, it’s just some notes and random stuff. Are there any downsides to using a free domain in my case?
Domains like .tk will be pushed down in Google results, you will have issues when you will try to send mails from such domain, etc. If something is free and attractive it's usually abused.
If you don't care about such things and you can easily move to another domain without any issues (people still accessing old domain, maybe finding a scammy website after domain is being taken from you, your mails no longer being delivered to you) then go for it.
If you don't care about such things and you can easily move to another domain without any issues (people still accessing old domain, maybe finding a scammy website after domain is being taken from you, your mails no longer being delivered to you) then go for it.
I think he meant the free suvdlmain the comes with GitHub pages, xxx.GitHub.io
No, you can use a domain address you have gotten elsewhere and have it resolve to your GitHub pages. I’ve been doing this for awhile and have never paid a penny.
> buy a gTLD managed by Google (.app, .dev)
"Google suspended our domain out of the blue – lyearn[.]com" -> https://twitter.com/shuchit_gandhi/status/156882926948860313...
"Google suspended our domain out of the blue – lyearn[.]com" -> https://twitter.com/shuchit_gandhi/status/156882926948860313...
This story relates to Google Domains, the registrar entity of Google, not the registry entity.
I would personally never trust Google as a registrar because they have a horrible track record regarding customer support. As a gTLD registry though, they’re supervised by the ICANN and just cannot afford to make a shitty job there. Being a registry is also, IMHO, way easier than being a registrar, you obey ICANN rules, but you’re the one setting the rules for the registrars. Google as a registry is fine. You’re free to not trust them either as a registry, but that would be for personal convictions, not objective.
I would personally never trust Google as a registrar because they have a horrible track record regarding customer support. As a gTLD registry though, they’re supervised by the ICANN and just cannot afford to make a shitty job there. Being a registry is also, IMHO, way easier than being a registrar, you obey ICANN rules, but you’re the one setting the rules for the registrars. Google as a registry is fine. You’re free to not trust them either as a registry, but that would be for personal convictions, not objective.
Could you maybe expand on what the risks are with registries?
When I trust a company to be my gTLD registry, what am I trusting them with? Why is Google safer than e.g. the government of Tuvalu, or some private "speculator", if they all have to follow ICANN rules?
When I trust a company to be my gTLD registry, what am I trusting them with? Why is Google safer than e.g. the government of Tuvalu, or some private "speculator", if they all have to follow ICANN rules?
ccTLD (2 characters, are usually managed by countries, except for .eu and maybe a handful of other exceptions) *do not* follow ICANN’s rules. Governments are owners of the TLD of their own country, and set the administrative rules. On the admin side, you’re trusting the countries to not change the rules against you. It’s probably not a good idea to rent a .ru if you’re Ukrainian for example. You’re also trusting them regarding a part of the DNS resolution: a DNS query first goes by the root DNS, which will resolve the TLD to the registry’s DNS server, which will resolve the domain to the registrar’s DNS servers, which will do the rest. The registry could theoretically override your records on their layers. So same thing, don’t use a ccTLD you don’t trust (that’s true of all TLDs, but even more for ccTLDs). On a technical side, some countries have crappy infrastructures, so resolution is at risk. It happened to Notion a few months ago with their .so domain (Somalia). Some poor countries delegate the technical side of operations to more reliable registries.
Google is safer because it only manages gTLDs. They can set part of the rules, but not all the rules. They have to follow ICANN’s rules. In particular, the dispute process goes through the ICANN which gives a somewhat neutral safety net. It’s far from perfectly, probably not even good enough, but still gives you more warranties than using a random ccTLD.
Speculators bought newGTLDs in the hope of selling tons of them but often dramatically failed. Registering a gTLD to the ICANN costs at least $400,000 if I remember well, so a lot of crappy newGTLDs are not profitable. When the registry goes bankrupt, I don’t know what happens to the customers. My guess is the ICANN tried to re-sell the TLD management on auction, and if they fail, then people would lose their domain. Very few newGTLDs succeeded, I’d stick with these and not try anything fun but too exotic.
Google is safer because it only manages gTLDs. They can set part of the rules, but not all the rules. They have to follow ICANN’s rules. In particular, the dispute process goes through the ICANN which gives a somewhat neutral safety net. It’s far from perfectly, probably not even good enough, but still gives you more warranties than using a random ccTLD.
Speculators bought newGTLDs in the hope of selling tons of them but often dramatically failed. Registering a gTLD to the ICANN costs at least $400,000 if I remember well, so a lot of crappy newGTLDs are not profitable. When the registry goes bankrupt, I don’t know what happens to the customers. My guess is the ICANN tried to re-sell the TLD management on auction, and if they fail, then people would lose their domain. Very few newGTLDs succeeded, I’d stick with these and not try anything fun but too exotic.
ccTLDs do not have to follow ICANN rules. They are treated as sovereign territory of the country they belong to. On a ccTLD the registry can take your domain from you at any moment for any reason.
While on a com, net, org the US government can take your domain from you at any moment for any reason?
Don't see much of a difference there.
Don't see much of a difference there.
That's not the case. The ICANN is an entity independent from the US. Well, that's not entirely true, but true enough that the US can't just take a .com from someone just like that.
Frankly, I would prefer if the USA just used .us (and .com.us, .org.us, .gov.us, etc) as a ccTDL and left .com, .net, .org, etc to be under the supervision of the UN.
The registry can still cancel registrations. The daily stormer is infamous for being kicked off of every major registry.
Note that .com is a TLD operated by Verisign, not Google, and anyway what is at issue here is the domain registrar, not the domain registry.
Definitely agree.
The one I co-own is an old-school .com domain. Probably still the best. If costs are your critical issue, maybe you should re-think your plans for having any of it online. We are not talking about a lot of money in any case.
The one I co-own is an old-school .com domain. Probably still the best. If costs are your critical issue, maybe you should re-think your plans for having any of it online. We are not talking about a lot of money in any case.
Though marketed as "see you" now, the origin of .cyou is apparently Chinese, changyou.
"Changyou" means "freedom to explore", and it's a brand under Sohu, which is popular in China in early days of Internet.
"The intention of the Beijing Gamease Age Digital Technology Co., Ltd. (“Cyou”) in filing this application is to proactively protect the ownership of the “Changyou.com” and “Cyou.com” trademark at the Internet Generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) name space and to provide a trusted, hierarchical and intuitive namespace for registrants and users that use Cyou’s broad range of high-quality entertainment and virtual communities services.
https://icannwiki.org/.cyou
"Changyou" means "freedom to explore", and it's a brand under Sohu, which is popular in China in early days of Internet.
"The intention of the Beijing Gamease Age Digital Technology Co., Ltd. (“Cyou”) in filing this application is to proactively protect the ownership of the “Changyou.com” and “Cyou.com” trademark at the Internet Generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) name space and to provide a trusted, hierarchical and intuitive namespace for registrants and users that use Cyou’s broad range of high-quality entertainment and virtual communities services.
https://icannwiki.org/.cyou
We’re so far into internet and email being a necessary utility, that I wonder at what point you’ll get some sort of state-given (but not -controlled) FQDN/email mailbox assigned to your legal name. (EDIT: I don’t mean handing off people’s data to a private corp — instead: there would be proper access control, encryption, etc. in place to prevent spying by the state giving it, or the company hosting it) Some countries have smart card IDs with well-defined PKI & personal certificates, you could build a whole E2EE citizen mailbox with that.
So: the same way you have a state-registered mailing address for official mail etc., you would have a state-registered email address, potentially @city-or-state.country-tld.
Of course you could use whatever email you want but rolling it out in the same process of legal ID means changing the default “paper mail” delivery to email, without having to just manually say “yes I want to receive emails instead” to everything.
So: the same way you have a state-registered mailing address for official mail etc., you would have a state-registered email address, potentially @city-or-state.country-tld.
Of course you could use whatever email you want but rolling it out in the same process of legal ID means changing the default “paper mail” delivery to email, without having to just manually say “yes I want to receive emails instead” to everything.
Most people around the world don't have a state registered postal address.
But, if they did, would that imply that the state ought to provide a free home to anyone who needs it?
Similarly, there's no state requirement to have a smartphone - or even a phone number. I understand that citizens of the USA can qualify for a state-provided phone and number, but I think that's quite rare.
Given that there are a plethora of free email providers, why would the state step in to manipulate this market?
But, if they did, would that imply that the state ought to provide a free home to anyone who needs it?
Similarly, there's no state requirement to have a smartphone - or even a phone number. I understand that citizens of the USA can qualify for a state-provided phone and number, but I think that's quite rare.
Given that there are a plethora of free email providers, why would the state step in to manipulate this market?
In Denmark I have a state-registered address (official letters come here), a state-registered digital mailbox (in practise, official letters go there), and a state-registered bank account (a tax refund or other money from the state would go there).
At least the state-registered address is required in many countries.
(Homeless people are still registered. The address might be a homelessness charity, or a whole city district.)
At least the state-registered address is required in many countries.
(Homeless people are still registered. The address might be a homelessness charity, or a whole city district.)
Dont forget state registered SMS (NemSMS)
> Most people around the world don't have a state registered postal address.
> Similarly, there's no state requirement to have a smartphone - or even a phone number. I understand that citizens of the USA can qualify for a state-provided phone and number, but I think that's quite rare.
True, also -- this is mostly based on my experience in Israel, not the USA, if that was accidentally implied. Here you do have some form of state-registered postal address (and can't remove, only change it), I don't know what homeless people have registered but from a brief check it's ignored if they're homeless. Instead, the city they're staying in handles it.
There's no smartphone requirement, but I'm not sure how they deal with someone who just doesn't have any phone, it's a requirement in a lot of auxiliary services.
> Given that there are a plethora of free email providers, why would the state step in to manipulate this market?
I thought that provisioning it with the relatively-new smart card IDs (i.e. certificate authentication) would allow for better starting security, less hacked accounts and such.
> Similarly, there's no state requirement to have a smartphone - or even a phone number. I understand that citizens of the USA can qualify for a state-provided phone and number, but I think that's quite rare.
True, also -- this is mostly based on my experience in Israel, not the USA, if that was accidentally implied. Here you do have some form of state-registered postal address (and can't remove, only change it), I don't know what homeless people have registered but from a brief check it's ignored if they're homeless. Instead, the city they're staying in handles it.
There's no smartphone requirement, but I'm not sure how they deal with someone who just doesn't have any phone, it's a requirement in a lot of auxiliary services.
> Given that there are a plethora of free email providers, why would the state step in to manipulate this market?
I thought that provisioning it with the relatively-new smart card IDs (i.e. certificate authentication) would allow for better starting security, less hacked accounts and such.
[deleted]
> I understand that citizens of the USA can qualify for a state-provided phone and number, but I think that's quite rare.
The so called “Obama phones”, not so rare…
They also have low-income landline programs, I believe, along with low-income home internet plans but I think the internet ones are for households with school age children judging by the radio ads I used to hear.
The so called “Obama phones”, not so rare…
They also have low-income landline programs, I believe, along with low-income home internet plans but I think the internet ones are for households with school age children judging by the radio ads I used to hear.
> would that imply that the state ought to provide a free home to anyone who needs it?
In some few countries & metro areas, people have decided to answer Yes to this question, so it’s not purely rhetorical.
In some few countries & metro areas, people have decided to answer Yes to this question, so it’s not purely rhetorical.
> But, if they did, would that imply that the state ought to provide a free home to anyone who needs it?
Yes.
Yes.
One problem I see with this is that if one's email somehow gets onto a spammer's list, there's likely no way to change their email address, since it's presumably formed from an ID number of some sort.
Changing an email address seems like a solution totally out of proportion to the pesky problem of spam. I can see many ways for the system to work effectively:
1. Have this "official" email only for communication with "state" entities, or some such filtered allow-list. It would be fantastic to have a high-SNR electronic channel for "all the important govt bureaucratic stuff". Folks could always forward mail to a unified inbox if they wish, but regardless they get an effective filtering tool.
2. For non allow-list entities, charge some trivial amount for every incoming mail that goes unread or gets flagged by a user as spam (or some such). I suspect this will quickly change the economics to make most spray-and-pray crap to become unviable.
In essence, as with any communication system, I think the most important design goal is to have high SNR (Signal-to-Noise Ratio) channels which we can suitably label for specific delineated intents. We shouldn't be treating the inbox as a monolith with all pieces of uniform importance (or dictated by the shiny content of emails); we should be able to leverage IT to have the system work in the user's interest -- it's a matter of setting up incentives/responsibilities.
1. Have this "official" email only for communication with "state" entities, or some such filtered allow-list. It would be fantastic to have a high-SNR electronic channel for "all the important govt bureaucratic stuff". Folks could always forward mail to a unified inbox if they wish, but regardless they get an effective filtering tool.
2. For non allow-list entities, charge some trivial amount for every incoming mail that goes unread or gets flagged by a user as spam (or some such). I suspect this will quickly change the economics to make most spray-and-pray crap to become unviable.
In essence, as with any communication system, I think the most important design goal is to have high SNR (Signal-to-Noise Ratio) channels which we can suitably label for specific delineated intents. We shouldn't be treating the inbox as a monolith with all pieces of uniform importance (or dictated by the shiny content of emails); we should be able to leverage IT to have the system work in the user's interest -- it's a matter of setting up incentives/responsibilities.
Germany has tried setting up a parallel, email-like system where it cost money to send messages to avoid spam. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-Mail
Uptake has been so limited, it‘s essentially useless.
Uptake has been so limited, it‘s essentially useless.
Yeah, and harassments are going to be huge problem as well. Full names displayed anywhere unless necessary, is generally a bad idea. It's not going to work - IF taken at full face value without further considerations.
That said, I think might make sense as an address system for signing and verification. It'd be nice if I could just sign into a local municipality or state-level server with a national ID to read notices and do verification, instead of walking to the city hall and twice in a week and uploading drivers_license.jpg to weird e-commerce websites on random occasions.
That said, I think might make sense as an address system for signing and verification. It'd be nice if I could just sign into a local municipality or state-level server with a national ID to read notices and do verification, instead of walking to the city hall and twice in a week and uploading drivers_license.jpg to weird e-commerce websites on random occasions.
Ideally it would only be possible to receive mail from the government and a select few entities (bank, electricity provider, etc).
> presumably formed from an ID number of some sort.
One possible solution is that the address for an individual must be obtained from a directory before sending a mail. Allowing for the possibility of changing it in the future. Access to that information can then be granted/revoked by the individual as they see fit. Something similar to re:claimID.
https://www.gnunet.org/en/reclaim/tech.html
> presumably formed from an ID number of some sort.
One possible solution is that the address for an individual must be obtained from a directory before sending a mail. Allowing for the possibility of changing it in the future. Access to that information can then be granted/revoked by the individual as they see fit. Something similar to re:claimID.
https://www.gnunet.org/en/reclaim/tech.html
Right, I didn't think of that, that practically seals it I guess.
Halfbaked thought: Have it cost half the amount as normal mail to receive email there.
Perhaps also gov use is free, and users can whitelist specific domains or subdomains to be free.
Better yet, you could allow emails cryptographically signed by chosen entities (*.gov, power company, etc) and reject everything else.
Fix those problems: Better spam protection, more stringent penalties for spammers.
This seems like trying to find a problem for the email solution.
The mail system as it is is working. It has been for many years. It costs a non-significant amount of money to send mail, so this takes care of the spam problem: spam exists but isn't free so it isn't profitable. There's no need to have PKI or "personal certificates" infrastructure so even 80-year olds can receive and read mail.
I have a mailbox. The government is obligated to send stuff there. If I move, I can redirect my mail. I would hate to have a (new) obligation to check my "government-assigned" email box (protected by "PKI" or "personal certificate"), or face penalties for not doing that — in addition to my obligation to check my mailbox. My parents would never be able to take care of it, so it would fall (again) on me to check their email boxes as well.
The mail system as it is is working. It has been for many years. It costs a non-significant amount of money to send mail, so this takes care of the spam problem: spam exists but isn't free so it isn't profitable. There's no need to have PKI or "personal certificates" infrastructure so even 80-year olds can receive and read mail.
I have a mailbox. The government is obligated to send stuff there. If I move, I can redirect my mail. I would hate to have a (new) obligation to check my "government-assigned" email box (protected by "PKI" or "personal certificate"), or face penalties for not doing that — in addition to my obligation to check my mailbox. My parents would never be able to take care of it, so it would fall (again) on me to check their email boxes as well.
I'm increasingly keen on such a system. If nothing else, it removes the massive costs & uncertainty of paper delivery, and allows a searchable archive of the "important" bureaucratic stuff. Among other things, this also means that you don't have to update addresses in a hundred registries every time you move. This will obviously be a target for spammers, so I don't mind controlling inbox access very strictly (suggested a couple of mechanisms down the thread).
Basically, a high SNR channel which can be delineated for specific intent. This can be controlled through allow-lists or whatever.
Even from the state's perspective, this seems like a very cheap solution to what must be a great administrative burden.
Basically, a high SNR channel which can be delineated for specific intent. This can be controlled through allow-lists or whatever.
Even from the state's perspective, this seems like a very cheap solution to what must be a great administrative burden.
I'd really like to see 'forever' domain registration.
Pay your fee once, and the domain stays active forever.
The cost of running the servers for a top level domain are really small, and probably going down with time, so it should be possible for the domain registrar to keep operations going with just a trickle of new registrations.
As a compromise, perhaps you could charge a nominal fee for domain name ownership transfers.
Pay your fee once, and the domain stays active forever.
The cost of running the servers for a top level domain are really small, and probably going down with time, so it should be possible for the domain registrar to keep operations going with just a trickle of new registrations.
As a compromise, perhaps you could charge a nominal fee for domain name ownership transfers.
I believe that the owners of a custom TLD (like amazon's .pay) have to pay ICANN every year to keep that TLD alive. I believe it's over $100k annually.
as such, a forever registration would have to be a quasi-pyramid scheme where the initial users keep their domains only so long as there are more new users coming in each year than existed in all the past years combined (or something similar depending on charges).
also, what good is a forever domain when it doesn't also have forever hosting? You die, the domain continues on forever, your hosting provider stops hosting and now no-one else can ever use that domain. Kind-of a jerk move in the end.
as such, a forever registration would have to be a quasi-pyramid scheme where the initial users keep their domains only so long as there are more new users coming in each year than existed in all the past years combined (or something similar depending on charges).
also, what good is a forever domain when it doesn't also have forever hosting? You die, the domain continues on forever, your hosting provider stops hosting and now no-one else can ever use that domain. Kind-of a jerk move in the end.
> You die, the domain continues on forever, your hosting provider stops hosting and now no-one else can ever use that domain.
So not that different than today. You stop paying for your domain and squatters make sure no one can ever register that domain, for a reasonable fee, ever again.
So not that different than today. You stop paying for your domain and squatters make sure no one can ever register that domain, for a reasonable fee, ever again.
but they are using it. for some definition of "using".
That's...worse. Isn't "using" it to make sure it's unused till you get paid worse than it not being used right now but open to being usefully used by someone who intends to fully use it in the future?
> as such, a forever registration would have to be a quasi-pyramid scheme where the initial users keep their domains only so long as there are more new users coming in each year than existed in all the past years combined
It doesn't have to be a pyramid scheme. The registrar can also invest the money, and use the interest as revenue. So instead of paying 40 USD annually you pay 1000 USD for the initial registration. 4% interest of that would be 40 USD.
It doesn't have to be a pyramid scheme. The registrar can also invest the money, and use the interest as revenue. So instead of paying 40 USD annually you pay 1000 USD for the initial registration. 4% interest of that would be 40 USD.
What happens if the investment fucks up, and the registrar goes broke? Where does the domain buyer get the next renewal for free?
insurance
If they took your fee then invested it in some reliable asset, they could theoretically continue to earn an annuity on it indefinitely, which they could use to pay ICANN's fee, any server fees, etc. A hosting company could do the same.
> Pay your fee once, and the domain stays active forever.
Beyond domain squatters, who would benefit from that?
Beyond domain squatters, who would benefit from that?
It's part of the solution for a zero maintenance web presence.
It means I could maybe publish my memoirs and family tree and have it still available in 500 years.
It also makes web domains like other property - you don't purchase a nice watch and then expect it to be reassigned to someone else if you don't pay your annual watch renewals.
It means I could maybe publish my memoirs and family tree and have it still available in 500 years.
It also makes web domains like other property - you don't purchase a nice watch and then expect it to be reassigned to someone else if you don't pay your annual watch renewals.
I do expect my property to be reassigned if I don't pay my property taxes. Eternal ownership allows those who had power and money in the past to continue to have that power indefinitely, and is very detrimental to society.
That should be minimized as long as a limited number of domains per person (excluding legal entities) are allowed in a limited number of tlds.
Your property is both relatively scarce, limited, and requires significant service compared to random domains on some random tld.
Your property is both relatively scarce, limited, and requires significant service compared to random domains on some random tld.
Domains may not experience scarcity per se, but desirableness quickly falls of as the strings get more random.
Everyone would love to have a three- or four-letter domain but, like land, they're not making new characters for the ASCII alphabet.
Everyone would love to have a three- or four-letter domain but, like land, they're not making new characters for the ASCII alphabet.
We could restrict those too. Any desirable length, words, numbers, etc, could just be treated like normal domains.
If property prices always go up, in theory you could just finance the property to pay the taxes indefinitely
bad analogy. in effect you never own a TLD so its not a tax on ownership.
> It means I could maybe publish my memoirs and family tree and have it still available in 500 years.
This usecase makes no sense at all. If you plan to have a server going after you're no longer able to maintain a server, your only option is to pay someone to manage your infrastructure and/or services. Once you're paying some company to manage your infrastructures, managing domains becomes a subitem in your invoice.
This usecase makes no sense at all. If you plan to have a server going after you're no longer able to maintain a server, your only option is to pay someone to manage your infrastructure and/or services. Once you're paying some company to manage your infrastructures, managing domains becomes a subitem in your invoice.
You don't expect the watch to hang around forever, either. You'll lose it, sell it, or it will break. We don't want a future with indestructible watches littering the streets.
It could be "foo.tld2022", with YYYY registrable only in that year. Won't get in the way of future folks.
For memorials, it could be as uniform as firstname.lastname.disambiguation.birthyear.deathyear with the requirement that each person could only register one domain under the birthyear.deathyear root.
To get around the problem of a numeric TLD, I suggest using Roman numerals (and telling Myanmar it has to go back to using .bu).
To get around the problem of a numeric TLD, I suggest using Roman numerals (and telling Myanmar it has to go back to using .bu).
that also implies forever hosting of content, not just the domain.
Solvable through IPFS. When it comes to the domain, an onion v3 domain or unstoppable domains are good bets, although I really don't expect _any_ of our current computer infrastructure to exist within 500 years.
> It means I could maybe publish my memoirs and family tree and have it still available in 500 years.
While I'm sure this would be great for your ego, it makes no actual sense. Very few documents from so long ago are available, not because it was somehow miraculously impossible to preserve documents but because overwhelmingly people don't give a shit.
You are demanding that future people should give a shit, and they aren't going to oblige.
While I'm sure this would be great for your ego, it makes no actual sense. Very few documents from so long ago are available, not because it was somehow miraculously impossible to preserve documents but because overwhelmingly people don't give a shit.
You are demanding that future people should give a shit, and they aren't going to oblige.
?? Writing down your memoirs is "demanding other people give a shit"? What an odd way to view things.
I for one love to read historical documents and primary sources. I'm glad some people in ancient times had the foresight to record a bit of their lives in the hope that future generations might find it interesting.
I for one love to read historical documents and primary sources. I'm glad some people in ancient times had the foresight to record a bit of their lives in the hope that future generations might find it interesting.
Do you have any good memoirs you’d recommend?
I’ve always found personal accounts and memoirs to be the best kind of writing. You get to read beneath the surface between the person they were, the person they wanted to be and the worldly circumstances they found themselves in.
I’ve always found personal accounts and memoirs to be the best kind of writing. You get to read beneath the surface between the person they were, the person they wanted to be and the worldly circumstances they found themselves in.
Permanent hosting costs money, so you are in effect demanding that future folks give a shit about you.
You always have the option of committing your memoirs to stone, absorbing the long-term cost up front yourself.
You always have the option of committing your memoirs to stone, absorbing the long-term cost up front yourself.
Do the math (I'm a bit lazy and not that great at it) to think about how many ancestors you have from 500 years ago (I know enough about math to know it's an exponential function), and then think about how long it would take to read all of their memoirs and you begin to realize the problem.
Of course, go far back enough (I'm not sure if 500 years is enough) and mathematically speaking, the number of your ancestors will exceed the population of the world, which shows some other issues that you run into.
Of course, go far back enough (I'm not sure if 500 years is enough) and mathematically speaking, the number of your ancestors will exceed the population of the world, which shows some other issues that you run into.
The Carnegie Corporation might disagree with this somewhat, though I suppose it's only been acting as a dead hand of its founder for a touch over a century now, not the five that GP is going for.
Require the domain name to be a UUID or include the date or something else that makes it unsquattable. The domain being actually forever is far more important than it being pretty. Most people will use a search engine for lookup anyway, but it's the forever domain name that is a first step in preventing links from getting broken.
That said, this is not something I expect to happen in the regular Web, this seems to be a job for IPFS, blockchain or whatever. With plain HTTP, even if you have your forever domain, you'd still have the issue that the webserver it is pointing to can change, break or just disappear.
That said, this is not something I expect to happen in the regular Web, this seems to be a job for IPFS, blockchain or whatever. With plain HTTP, even if you have your forever domain, you'd still have the issue that the webserver it is pointing to can change, break or just disappear.
You’ve described an onion domain basically.
> Require the domain name to be a UUID or include the date or something else that makes it unsquattable.
What's the benefit of a UUID over a raw IP address?
What's the benefit of a UUID over a raw IP address?
You can change the hosting for the website.
Certificates?
> Certificates?
Not a technical requirement. Subject alternative name (SAN) certificates support IP addresses.
Not a technical requirement. Subject alternative name (SAN) certificates support IP addresses.
More clearly, "SAN certificates" aren't a thing. Since PKIX all certificates in the Web PKI were required to have the Internet's names on them as SANs. For several years now, web browsers only look at the SANs to make decisions. The Common Name from the X.500 system is only there for humans to look at, and for legacy software which still thinks that's a good idea decades after we explained why it isn't. Ideally we'd one day get rid of it (wastes bytes on the wire), but I won't hold my breath.
Unlike the Common Name, which is arbitrary human text (so e.g. " oops.example" is a valid name despite that space at the start, as are "c-programming.example\0\0\0" and "Ł0Ł.example") the SANs are defined so that it's harder to screw up and a machine can reliably just bit-for-bit compare the data. There are two main kinds: IpAddress SANs are defined for the IPv4 or IPv6 address just as bits, you can't express 200.300.400.500 as an IpAddress, whereas that's a (stupid but) valid Common Name; DnsName SANs are defined using a restricted character set and as specifically the ASCII LDH DNS hostname subset, which makes it much less tempting to try to incorrectly write a Unicode name here, what's actually required is the ASCII LDH name, ie Punycode.
Unlike the Common Name, which is arbitrary human text (so e.g. " oops.example" is a valid name despite that space at the start, as are "c-programming.example\0\0\0" and "Ł0Ł.example") the SANs are defined so that it's harder to screw up and a machine can reliably just bit-for-bit compare the data. There are two main kinds: IpAddress SANs are defined for the IPv4 or IPv6 address just as bits, you can't express 200.300.400.500 as an IpAddress, whereas that's a (stupid but) valid Common Name; DnsName SANs are defined using a restricted character set and as specifically the ASCII LDH DNS hostname subset, which makes it much less tempting to try to incorrectly write a Unicode name here, what's actually required is the ASCII LDH name, ie Punycode.
[deleted]
As those domains will be expensive compared to common ones since it's expected you'll be paying the equivalent of a number of renewal years, squatting will be a much more expensive business to do.
I don't see how squatters would benefit more from that than other people registering domains. If anything I'd expect them to prefer a recurring fee over a high upfront fee.
> I don't see how squatters would benefit more from that than other people registering domains.
Registering a domain is not an issue to anyone.
Some domain name registrars even offer multi-year subscription plans for those who don't want to bother with the 5minute work it takes to extend a subscription, and send out warnings months in advance to renew subscriptions.
Registering a domain is not an issue to anyone.
Some domain name registrars even offer multi-year subscription plans for those who don't want to bother with the 5minute work it takes to extend a subscription, and send out warnings months in advance to renew subscriptions.
Which registrars offer that?
> Which registrars offer that?
I expect all of them, and I'd be very surprised if any domain name registrar didn't offered this feature.
For example, both Namecheap and GoDaddy allow customers to extend domain registrations up to 10 years in one go.
I expect all of them, and I'd be very surprised if any domain name registrar didn't offered this feature.
For example, both Namecheap and GoDaddy allow customers to extend domain registrations up to 10 years in one go.
If anyone is curious as to why it is 10 years nearly everywhere, that limit comes from ICANN.
Network Solutions does offer a 100 year plan (and used to offer a 1000 year plan, but I just checked and that one is gone) but the way the implement is by registering for 10 years and then every year for the next 90 years adding a year.
You only really have the domain registered for 10 years, and you are betting the Network Solutions will still be around for 90 more years, and Network Solutions is betting that the price they have to pay for domains in that TLD will not have gone up so much that the total cost of all those extensions is more than what they earned by having your initial large [1] upfront payment invested for 100 years.
My recommendation: register your domain for 10 years. Don't turn on auto-renewal. Add an annual "Check my domain registration" item to your calendar. When that items come up each year either (1) add another year to your domain, or (2) check to see if it is near expiration and add years.
[1] $1600 for 100 years of a random .com.
Network Solutions does offer a 100 year plan (and used to offer a 1000 year plan, but I just checked and that one is gone) but the way the implement is by registering for 10 years and then every year for the next 90 years adding a year.
You only really have the domain registered for 10 years, and you are betting the Network Solutions will still be around for 90 more years, and Network Solutions is betting that the price they have to pay for domains in that TLD will not have gone up so much that the total cost of all those extensions is more than what they earned by having your initial large [1] upfront payment invested for 100 years.
My recommendation: register your domain for 10 years. Don't turn on auto-renewal. Add an annual "Check my domain registration" item to your calendar. When that items come up each year either (1) add another year to your domain, or (2) check to see if it is near expiration and add years.
[1] $1600 for 100 years of a random .com.
The 100 year plan is for $999: https://www.networksolutions.com/domain-name-registration/po...
Do you remember how much the 1000 year plan costed?
Do you remember how much the 1000 year plan costed?
No, and I can't find anything on it so it is possible that I misremembered. I definitely remember that they had a plan that was longer than the ICANN maximum and another plan that was way longer than that one, but it may have been 20 years and 100 years rather than 100 years and 1000 years.
Limit it to one per real person (not oganization etc)
i would like to have a permanent email for example .. a service for which i now pay godaddy though they dont actually do anything other than DNS
> Pay your fee once, and the domain stays active forever.
We had that for the .ro TLD. What happened was that a lot of useful domain names got acquired by random entities and sat there unused. And i don't mean "you can have this domain for $5K" unused, properly unused.
They switched to a yearly fee model (about 1/5 of what the forever fee was, plus credit if you paid the forever fee in the past 5 years) and that seems to have cleaned up the space a bit.
We had that for the .ro TLD. What happened was that a lot of useful domain names got acquired by random entities and sat there unused. And i don't mean "you can have this domain for $5K" unused, properly unused.
They switched to a yearly fee model (about 1/5 of what the forever fee was, plus credit if you paid the forever fee in the past 5 years) and that seems to have cleaned up the space a bit.
I don't think that would work well with the existing TLDs, where domain names often have meaning other than as just a domain name, and there is often more than one person or organization that would want that specific name.
Maybe make a new TLD specifically for infinitely lasting names, say .permanent, and make all top level names under that be 128 bit numbers in some text format randomly generated when you register the domain such as hex or base64. E.g., f560618f355b0ddf560456d41d635e3d.permanent or 9WBhjzVbDd9WBFbUHWNePQ==.permanent.
With those names it doesn't matter that they get locked up forever with the initial registrant.
> As a compromise, perhaps you could charge a nominal fee for domain name ownership transfers.
When the name is generated also generate a public/private key pair and associate the public key with the name at the top level servers. Someone is considered to own the domain if they can prove that they have the corresponding private key.
The top level would allow someone who has the private key to ask for a new key pair to be generated to replace the current one.
Want to transfer ownership? Give the new owner the private key and they can use it to do a key change.
This should allow making the top level service entirely automated and cheap to run.
Maybe make a new TLD specifically for infinitely lasting names, say .permanent, and make all top level names under that be 128 bit numbers in some text format randomly generated when you register the domain such as hex or base64. E.g., f560618f355b0ddf560456d41d635e3d.permanent or 9WBhjzVbDd9WBFbUHWNePQ==.permanent.
With those names it doesn't matter that they get locked up forever with the initial registrant.
> As a compromise, perhaps you could charge a nominal fee for domain name ownership transfers.
When the name is generated also generate a public/private key pair and associate the public key with the name at the top level servers. Someone is considered to own the domain if they can prove that they have the corresponding private key.
The top level would allow someone who has the private key to ask for a new key pair to be generated to replace the current one.
Want to transfer ownership? Give the new owner the private key and they can use it to do a key change.
This should allow making the top level service entirely automated and cheap to run.
That’s what unstoppable domains supposedly offers, or so I’ve heard.
Vitalik Buterin wrote an interesting analysis about how to allocate scarce domains, contrasting unstoppable’s approach with recurring demand based fees:
https://progressandpoverty.substack.com/p/should-there-be-de...
Vitalik Buterin wrote an interesting analysis about how to allocate scarce domains, contrasting unstoppable’s approach with recurring demand based fees:
https://progressandpoverty.substack.com/p/should-there-be-de...
Those aren't real domain names though, as they aren't reachable from normal DNS servers. >99.9% of people cannot use these.
Yeah, I’m fairly skeptical of crypto stuff myself. Do read vitalik’s article though, it has a lot of applications for domain allocation and isn’t dependent on crypto at all.
Forever is, as Prince once pointed out, a mighty long time.
Requiring periodic renewal ensures that the entity that is responsible for the domain is still alive, and still wants it. Allowing an entity to register a domain forever creates the possibility of zombie domains, registered forever through a registrar who has long since gone bust, by a registrant who long ago lost their password... but the registry is obliged to still maintain the last state of that domain's NS records forever.
Nobody would be able to initiate a transfer; nobody would be able to buy the domain off the owner... the resource would be permanently dead.
Requiring periodic renewal ensures that the entity that is responsible for the domain is still alive, and still wants it. Allowing an entity to register a domain forever creates the possibility of zombie domains, registered forever through a registrar who has long since gone bust, by a registrant who long ago lost their password... but the registry is obliged to still maintain the last state of that domain's NS records forever.
Nobody would be able to initiate a transfer; nobody would be able to buy the domain off the owner... the resource would be permanently dead.
Yes please, that'd be amazing.
However, it would be good to have some kind of system to weed out unused domains for other uses. Otherwise I imagine we'd have lots of occupied but abandoned domain names.
I've thought about this too, and it should somewhat be possible to set up some form of long-lived association, with day-to-day management outsourced to professional service providers.
The one-time cost for a domain should be substantial, with the capital put into long-term investments like index funds, which are then used to pay domain renewal (and maybe static webhosting) costs year after year.
If people can set up trust funds for their families and estates, I don't see why it's not possible to do a niche "trust fund" for websites.
Happy to have someone steal my idea. :)
The one-time cost for a domain should be substantial, with the capital put into long-term investments like index funds, which are then used to pay domain renewal (and maybe static webhosting) costs year after year.
If people can set up trust funds for their families and estates, I don't see why it's not possible to do a niche "trust fund" for websites.
Happy to have someone steal my idea. :)
[deleted]
We looked into it, but it's essentially impossible under current ICANN rules, which require that domain registrations have an integer number of years of validity of 1 to 10.
What happens when you die?
One can start with "forever" being, say, 125 years (Wikipedia says that the longest lived person recorded was slightly over 120). So domain expiry date=current date+125-current age. When human beings routinely start living longer than that, it can be revised.
Well like graveyard sone just want to leave a stone there forever next to the church. It is sometimes good read. And each of our existence is unique even if may not be “important” to all or any. Still …
Forever is good. Especially if you know it is forever than you say thing that you want to say forever.
Forever is good. Especially if you know it is forever than you say thing that you want to say forever.
Most graveyards don't work like that - at least not in my part of the world. Graves are regularly re-used and stones are moved.
We can't expect the dead to continue to exert pressure over the living.
We can't expect the dead to continue to exert pressure over the living.
But the thing is I want my stuff to stay up long after I die. Kind of like my gravestone on the internet where I can choose what to put.
I dont care if it eventually gets lost amongst the huge amount of content but I still want my stuff to be out there.
I dont care if it eventually gets lost amongst the huge amount of content but I still want my stuff to be out there.
I'd say nothing, it continues to stay in my name and cannot be registered by anyone else, ever. The domain hosting service may disappear, and that's fine too.
This is one application where blockchain tech could actually solved a real world problem. There are workable DNS systems tied to the Blockchain, which would allow for permanent unassailable domains with no central authority to take it away. Widespread adoption is of course the main issue.
It would have to be regulated to some degree to prevent extreme squatting, e.g.: one domain per ID would be a good start. Maybe one that isn’t a trademark too? Sort of paving the way for a name/pseudonym domain to be registered this way.
This reminds me, Epik markets a 'forever' domain registration. Not what you're asking though as they just renew a domain perpetually so depends on domain operator remaining active (as well as Epik itself).
Put it on ipfs. Long as someone cares, it'll stay up there.
Not really if you want mutability.
IPNS "records" have a TTL so you need someone with the key actively re-publishing them. I guess in theory you could publish for a very long time but you risk issues of someone maliciously re-sharing an older record that hasn't expired.
I guess once you die you can hope that someone has recorded the last version so you can "move" from IPNS to a regular CID. But IDK how much I would want to rely on that for long-term legacy especially if the TTL on your IPNS record is shirt. Although I guess IPNS records are small enough that it would be fairly easy to set up a service that recorded all published IPNS records. Maybe publish it as a merkle tree so it is infeasible to tamper with old records.
IPNS "records" have a TTL so you need someone with the key actively re-publishing them. I guess in theory you could publish for a very long time but you risk issues of someone maliciously re-sharing an older record that hasn't expired.
I guess once you die you can hope that someone has recorded the last version so you can "move" from IPNS to a regular CID. But IDK how much I would want to rely on that for long-term legacy especially if the TTL on your IPNS record is shirt. Although I guess IPNS records are small enough that it would be fairly easy to set up a service that recorded all published IPNS records. Maybe publish it as a merkle tree so it is infeasible to tamper with old records.
If this is a 500 year old legacy, I don't think mutability is a criteria. Seems it's more a question of if anyone's going to care enough to host it.
I meant that you likely want mutability while you live. Then an archive once you die.
Yeah, and I'd like to have a driver's license that will never expire.
But neither of these things will ever happen, for approximately the same reason.
But neither of these things will ever happen, for approximately the same reason.
In Arizona driver’s licenses are good until you’re 65 which effectively, if you’re a particularly bad driver and die in a horrific crash between 16 and 65, never expires.
OpenNIC
EU.org domains can be registered for free and do not expire. I've registered one more than 10 years ago, set up DNS using he.net and never had any issues.
To avoid confusion: ”This site has no relation with the European Union, despite its name.”[1]
> do not expire
The current expiration date for all eu.org domains is 2026-08-08[2].
[1] https://nic.eu.org/
[2] https://who.is/whois/eu.org
> do not expire
The current expiration date for all eu.org domains is 2026-08-08[2].
[1] https://nic.eu.org/
[2] https://who.is/whois/eu.org
> EU.org domains can be registered for free and do not expire.
But "eu.org" is not a TLD.
If I were looking to register a domain for 10 years, the last thing I would do is put myself at the mercy of a middleman peddling subdomains.
But "eu.org" is not a TLD.
If I were looking to register a domain for 10 years, the last thing I would do is put myself at the mercy of a middleman peddling subdomains.
All registrations are at the mercy of a middleman, especially gTLD registrations.
Ok... So two middlemen
Similarly for JS developers out there, https://js.org/ has free subdomains for anything related to JavaScript
See also https://www.getfreedomain.name for more free subdomains like that. I guess something like this is good enough for "a website", but you eventually end up getting what you paid for ...
.eu.org namespace isn't crowded either. I could register my first name with it, and gleefully kept it for a few years now. I have more trust with them to run it more than those novelty gTLDs that run all sorts of games to take as much money as possible.
I experienced my DNS service quitting and being unable to change my nameservers in EU.org; my email had changed, so automatic reset didn’t work, and guess how much tech support you get when you pay zero.
EU.org cannot be recommended for longevity.
EU.org cannot be recommended for longevity.
Not sure if it applies, but when the UK left the EU, our access to EU domains was, predictably, cut off. Apart from the politics of it, it was jarring because domain names can be so pivotal to so many aspects of business and life.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/registering-and-renewing-eu-doma...
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/registering-and-renewing-eu-doma...
I've thought about putting together a bid for a gTLD, but operating it like every other username-based system. Once you register, you own the domain for free forever.
It's expensive: > $200,000 to apply, ~$50,000 / yr to maintain, plus $0.25 / yr per domain. [1]
You could run such a system on ads, but you could also do the Let's Encrypt / completely open route where you raise money and build up an endowment to run in perpetuity.
Imagine how cool Twitter would be if you had "username.twitter". Or could email "[email protected]" (or "username@twitter"). Same with gmail, etc.
I've also thought about registering one in my first name and keeping it to myself. It's super nerdy and way cooler than an NFT or ".eth" domain.
[1] https://www.instra.com/en/new-gtlds/pricing
It's expensive: > $200,000 to apply, ~$50,000 / yr to maintain, plus $0.25 / yr per domain. [1]
You could run such a system on ads, but you could also do the Let's Encrypt / completely open route where you raise money and build up an endowment to run in perpetuity.
Imagine how cool Twitter would be if you had "username.twitter". Or could email "[email protected]" (or "username@twitter"). Same with gmail, etc.
I've also thought about registering one in my first name and keeping it to myself. It's super nerdy and way cooler than an NFT or ".eth" domain.
[1] https://www.instra.com/en/new-gtlds/pricing
This is 1000% something I’ve thought about, if I ever got too much money… just registering .name with ICANN and having a website called its.david for example. Email [email protected] or even like me@david as the full email address if you had a root level mx record[0]. Then of course a root level website of just david.
Would just be insanely fun to play with & ruin other developers days when I complain that their form isn’t accepting my email. And really just generally confusing everyone.
Maybe someday :)
[0] I looked it up, it should be possible!! https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40349412/why-do-not-more...
Would just be insanely fun to play with & ruin other developers days when I complain that their form isn’t accepting my email. And really just generally confusing everyone.
Maybe someday :)
[0] I looked it up, it should be possible!! https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40349412/why-do-not-more...
From the link you've provided:
"For the newer gTLDs, like .google, ICANN's application rules specify that they must not have A or MX records (apart from temporarily the special "if you used this name internally you're about to have a problem" records before the gTLD went live)."
"For the newer gTLDs, like .google, ICANN's application rules specify that they must not have A or MX records (apart from temporarily the special "if you used this name internally you're about to have a problem" records before the gTLD went live)."
you'd also be able to go to just the TLD, ie http:// david /
just like this, the shortest website url that still works?
http://ai/
just like this, the shortest website url that still works?
http://ai/
Isn’t this the perfect scenario for using a crowdfunded solution?
If you consider “forever” to be 100 years for a person, you could charge 1k upfront, and you would need 5000 people to be able to maintain it.
>you would need 5000 people to be able to maintain it
For 1yr.
For 1yr.
$1 000 * $5 000 = $5 000 000
$250 000 first year and $52 500 in following years = 91 years until the money runs out. Of course there is no doubt other costs involved, but you'd make it past a year.
$250 000 first year and $52 500 in following years = 91 years until the money runs out. Of course there is no doubt other costs involved, but you'd make it past a year.
I was still sleeping it seems. Indeed 1k is reasonable price for this to reach about a century.
If you’re looking for longevity, “free” should be the last thing you’re looking for. An agreement without an exchange of value is not an enforceable contract, and so any free service can be revoked at any time, even ones that promise they are “free forever”.
Enforceable where? How? An agreement with an exchange of value is not always enforceable either. So, although I too hope exchange of value would add more legitimacy to an agreement, it is not always the case.
What happens if the sponsor or administrator of one of these gTLDs disappears? A lot of them seem marginal and I wouldn’t be too surprised if some were not around in 10 years.
This isn't unprecedented, plenty of vanity TLDs were retired:
https://dzdb.caida.org/tlds/graveyard
https://dzdb.caida.org/tlds/graveyard
None of these seem particularly tragic. It looks like they’re all brands that decided they didn’t want to renew their rights to the TLD. No biggie.
I wish that table were sortable. Why HTML tables haven't been sortable by clicking their headers since 1.0 of the standard is beyond me.
They won't disappear. There is a process by which ICANN will assign another registry operator to continue hosting them: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/ebero-2013-04-02-en
(Note that all registries are continuously escrowing data on all domains on their TLDs on a daily basis for precisely this reason.)
(Note that all registries are continuously escrowing data on all domains on their TLDs on a daily basis for precisely this reason.)
In my original DNS and Bind book. When people used to look after their own nameservers, it mentions the idea of farming out subdomains in a trusted community spirit.
As such ask a friend to point a subdomain your way.
As such ask a friend to point a subdomain your way.
I like that.
And if you were to add your domain to the public suffix list (https://publicsuffix.org/) it would effectively be treated like a domain name rather than subdomain name within browsers for JS security, etc.
For example, if you look at the list: https://publicsuffix.org/list/public_suffix_list.dat
You'll notice that myshopify.com is on there... effectively allowing subdomains of that (customer specific, each customer does not trust other customers) is now treated like a domain so that customer1.myshopify.com and customer2.myshopify.com are both isolated from each other by apps and systems that utilise the PSL (all major browsers, etc).
And if you were to add your domain to the public suffix list (https://publicsuffix.org/) it would effectively be treated like a domain name rather than subdomain name within browsers for JS security, etc.
For example, if you look at the list: https://publicsuffix.org/list/public_suffix_list.dat
You'll notice that myshopify.com is on there... effectively allowing subdomains of that (customer specific, each customer does not trust other customers) is now treated like a domain so that customer1.myshopify.com and customer2.myshopify.com are both isolated from each other by apps and systems that utilise the PSL (all major browsers, etc).
Why is this a centralized list instead of just a DNS TXT record?
Because Shopify might prefer to NOT be on that list, to make cross-vendor analytics easier for them.
But then you're relying on your friend to keep paying (ever increasing) costs per year to keep their domain registered.
You might divide that namespace greatly. The one higher up the pyramid still isn't paying 100,000 whatevera a year. In the main the vast majority of users don't give a rat's arse about the domain. But they do have trust issues. Webs of trust can ease this. And relieve you from the scam world of vanity TLDs and overpriced digital number plates.
If you want a .ovh domain, which is perhaps "markety" but is cheap, you can get one for £1.60 and then £3 per year.
OVH are pretty big and decent and unlikely to go away any time soon.
https://www.ovhcloud.com/en-gb/domains/tld/
OVH are pretty big and decent and unlikely to go away any time soon.
https://www.ovhcloud.com/en-gb/domains/tld/
Does it work with US accounts? It seems that no option for registrar to my US account.
Two more tips - go here
https://porkbun.com/products/domains
Scan down the list looking for sale pricing in renewal column. Occasionally there is 2-3 dollar pa stuff there and you can buy 10 years of that
Also if you meet the nationality requirements netcup does easter sales that have perpetual euro per year .de domains. .de isn't entirely clogged yet so you can get a short-ish name for dev purposes
https://porkbun.com/products/domains
Scan down the list looking for sale pricing in renewal column. Occasionally there is 2-3 dollar pa stuff there and you can buy 10 years of that
Also if you meet the nationality requirements netcup does easter sales that have perpetual euro per year .de domains. .de isn't entirely clogged yet so you can get a short-ish name for dev purposes
> Of course, paying for hosting for a decade is a different matter!
Not well known as it doesn't seem to have a translated page for it but OVH offers a free 10MB hosting with 1 email account for each domain registered with them [1].
[1] https://www.ovhcloud.com/fr/domains/free-web-hosting/
Not well known as it doesn't seem to have a translated page for it but OVH offers a free 10MB hosting with 1 email account for each domain registered with them [1].
[1] https://www.ovhcloud.com/fr/domains/free-web-hosting/
"10MB ought to be enough for anybody"
If you plan to have an internet connection then you already have hosting. Point the domain at your home IP.
> Point the domain at your home IP.
This doesn't really work, if you're behind carrier grade NAT and inbound traffic gets dropped.
For example, I tried having a homelab where 2 of my servers would be publicly accessible, could join Docker Swarm/Kubernetes clusters that would be controlled from other cloud VPSes or vice versa, but couldn't really do that.
I did actually document how I worked around it by having 2 cheap VPSes with static IP addresses that forwarded traffic to my local servers, with the local servers being the ones to establish the connection with WireGuard in my blog post "How to publicly access your homelab behind NAT": https://blog.kronis.dev/tutorials/how-to-publicly-access-you...
Of course, forwarding all ports (even if most are closed) might be a little bit insane and the article could be written better, but definitely not everyone gets publicly accessible IPs from their ISP without opening their wallet and forking over some cash (getting a VPS and using WireGuard was easier).
Then again, having a homelab and using personal hardware for hosting non-essential stuff is a pretty great approach! You'll most likely be able to get resources much cheaper than renting VPSes from most providers (especially AWS, Azure and GCP) would be in the long term. That said, things like my homepage or blog are hosted "in the cloud" due to this allowing me to break my homelab or have maintenance windows whenever I want without inconveniencing anyone.
This doesn't really work, if you're behind carrier grade NAT and inbound traffic gets dropped.
For example, I tried having a homelab where 2 of my servers would be publicly accessible, could join Docker Swarm/Kubernetes clusters that would be controlled from other cloud VPSes or vice versa, but couldn't really do that.
I did actually document how I worked around it by having 2 cheap VPSes with static IP addresses that forwarded traffic to my local servers, with the local servers being the ones to establish the connection with WireGuard in my blog post "How to publicly access your homelab behind NAT": https://blog.kronis.dev/tutorials/how-to-publicly-access-you...
Of course, forwarding all ports (even if most are closed) might be a little bit insane and the article could be written better, but definitely not everyone gets publicly accessible IPs from their ISP without opening their wallet and forking over some cash (getting a VPS and using WireGuard was easier).
Then again, having a homelab and using personal hardware for hosting non-essential stuff is a pretty great approach! You'll most likely be able to get resources much cheaper than renting VPSes from most providers (especially AWS, Azure and GCP) would be in the long term. That said, things like my homepage or blog are hosted "in the cloud" due to this allowing me to break my homelab or have maintenance windows whenever I want without inconveniencing anyone.
If you're behind carrier grade NAT and inbound traffic gets dropped then you don't have an internet connection.
> If you're behind carrier grade NAT and inbound traffic gets dropped then you don't have an internet connection.
What an interesting statement. It's certainly called an Internet connection in all of the marketing materials and is regarded as such by everyone that I've talked to. I guess it's a case of most people's standards and thus common parlance being vastly different to what someone else might expect. Then again, self hosting is a niche thing to do, so that's understandable.
In addition, one could even argue that giving people's devices public IP addresses might be a bit problematic in the first place, from a security point of view - in University every device that I connected to the network got a public IP address and without fail any with an SSH server was the subject of attacks not long after.
Though the real explanation is probably one that has to do with finances and the lack of IPv4 addresses, as well as the fact that IPv6 adoption in Latvia is basically non-existent, from what I can tell.
What an interesting statement. It's certainly called an Internet connection in all of the marketing materials and is regarded as such by everyone that I've talked to. I guess it's a case of most people's standards and thus common parlance being vastly different to what someone else might expect. Then again, self hosting is a niche thing to do, so that's understandable.
In addition, one could even argue that giving people's devices public IP addresses might be a bit problematic in the first place, from a security point of view - in University every device that I connected to the network got a public IP address and without fail any with an SSH server was the subject of attacks not long after.
Though the real explanation is probably one that has to do with finances and the lack of IPv4 addresses, as well as the fact that IPv6 adoption in Latvia is basically non-existent, from what I can tell.
Exactly what i did. The biggest price to pay (except knowledge, but this is HN) is the fact that my host uses a mains plug near my router. I personally use an old hp pc as a virtualization host but you can get started with a 40$ raspberry pi.
Then again for US folk this is untenable because of data caps that could be blown by dos attacks. Personally free.fr gets me 5Gb down, 1Gb up for 50 euros a month, so maybe some getting your internet infrastructure up to date is in order first.
Then again for US folk this is untenable because of data caps that could be blown by dos attacks. Personally free.fr gets me 5Gb down, 1Gb up for 50 euros a month, so maybe some getting your internet infrastructure up to date is in order first.
Data caps aren't really a thing in the US, at least as far as every internet provider I have ever used.
Comcast is a major cable internet supplier in the US and has data caps.
You can also just use TLDList and sort by price: https://tld-list.com/. Never buying a domain without consulting it first.
My take: you may not want a domain unsuitable for email. Most "new" gTLDs and especially cheaper ones[1] have worse deliverability.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32202646
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32202646
At work we block a bunch of TLDs like .icu, .xyz, .top, .live, .work, etc... because we only got spam from them.
I dislike this kind of overblocking a lot. Not just TLD blocklists, but also IP blocklists.
I recently had to write an email to my local police station ([email protected]) and their server was rejecting it because my IP (vultr) was on the "Proofpoint® Dynamic Reputation"-blacklist. I owned this single IPv4 for at least 3 years, so they whole vultr range must have been blocked by Proofpoint.
Great if you can't even contact your government because they are using some shitty blocklist product.
Personally, I run a mailcow instance with Rspamd and get only very few spam mails, albeit my email was being leaked in the ledger.com hack a few years ago. When I was still using mailbox.org, I got crypto spam mails (update your wallet yada yada) in my inbox twice a day. So just a configuration thing(?).
I recently had to write an email to my local police station ([email protected]) and their server was rejecting it because my IP (vultr) was on the "Proofpoint® Dynamic Reputation"-blacklist. I owned this single IPv4 for at least 3 years, so they whole vultr range must have been blocked by Proofpoint.
Great if you can't even contact your government because they are using some shitty blocklist product.
Personally, I run a mailcow instance with Rspamd and get only very few spam mails, albeit my email was being leaked in the ledger.com hack a few years ago. When I was still using mailbox.org, I got crypto spam mails (update your wallet yada yada) in my inbox twice a day. So just a configuration thing(?).
> Great if you can't even contact your government because they are using some shitty blocklist product.
I wonder how this is legal. Then again, I guess them throwing snail mail into the trash or refusing to open letters from particular individuals (as an example) would carry a different weight than some technical solution that nobody understands acting badly, with no particular person really being "responsible" for it.
I wonder how this is legal. Then again, I guess them throwing snail mail into the trash or refusing to open letters from particular individuals (as an example) would carry a different weight than some technical solution that nobody understands acting badly, with no particular person really being "responsible" for it.
I made similar experiences with a Hetzner VPS that I use to run mailcow (the TLD I'm using is .xyz). I refuse to give up though. One time I tried to contact my local city authority but they straight up blocked my emails. What followed was an email exchange with a slightly annoyed undertone by the guy that I reached via the postmaster address. In the end he apparently put me on some whitelist and my mail could be delivered.
Especially annoying is that in some cases filters blocking my mail are used on the postmaster address too, so to resolve an issue I have to use my gmail address.
Especially annoying is that in some cases filters blocking my mail are used on the postmaster address too, so to resolve an issue I have to use my gmail address.
I gave up on sending email myself and switched to smtp2go. I couldn't even get gmail to deliver my custom domain's email if I sent it from home (it was including my home IP in the outgoing headers!).
For low-volume home use, I definitely recommend just outsourcing SMTP to a company that does it professionally.
For low-volume home use, I definitely recommend just outsourcing SMTP to a company that does it professionally.
You need to host your email somewhere else. Any of the big name VPS providers are going to be on a blocklist. I've tried a bunch and its always the same pain
Gave up hosting my own, just not worth the headaches.
Gave up hosting my own, just not worth the headaches.
oh.. that seems bad.
first, it seems unfair.
second, I just got a .cx and plan to use it for email, I hope I don't have issues with it.
first, it seems unfair.
second, I just got a .cx and plan to use it for email, I hope I don't have issues with it.
Do you live on Christmas Island? A certain infamous .cx domain was revoked when a resident complained that the owner didn't have ties to the island (though the content probably had more to do it than anything)
Is there a public list of TLDs that organizations block by default? I was surprised to find out .live which I was considering to buy for my family's personal email.
In my experience any ccTLD never gets blocked, including "funky" ones like .sh or .dj. My primary email ends with .online, and I also have some aliases in case .online "fails" (as in services refuse to send an email to it). I'd estimate it happens a couple of times per year.
A friend of mine got a .su (soviet union) domain for the laughs (he is a staunch free market libertarian). So far so good but I’ve noticed my Unifi IDS was throwing alerts for his website due to the bad rep of the su TLD.
That's interesting. I was thinking for using it to receive email, rather than send it. I wonder if that's also a problem?
There shouldn't be any issues with receiving messages sent to newgTLD domain but some websites may refuse to register new accounts with such addresses. Rather uncommon but it may happen.
I’ve worked at a couple large internet entities and both of them spend stupid amounts of money buying their domains and typeos of their domains in every tld. They also pay for the porn versions of their names just so porn producers don’t register them. On top of that they pay other entities to have a legal presence where needed to secure country tlds. They also pay for full time monitoring to ensure they don’t lose their domsins to time or changing requirements. It is hundreds of thousands a year in the end.
I’m clearly in the wrong business.
I’m clearly in the wrong business.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned afraid.org so far - they're free and seem to be operating since 2001, according to their "About us" page...
I've used their service in the past and as far as i recall, it worked flawlessly...
I've used their service in the past and as far as i recall, it worked flawlessly...
Wow, the mess with their upstream registrar two months ago sounds like such a nightmare:
https://afraid.org/news/
Confirms my theory: everything ICANN touches turns to poop.
https://afraid.org/news/
Confirms my theory: everything ICANN touches turns to poop.
Same. Been using it for soooo long. It's fun that the UI has been the same the whole time.
Thanks for eu.org you offer a free viable solution and just teach me by the way the origin of .org ... incredible
eu.org !
eu.org !
Appreciate the brevity. There’s zero guff or extraneous info. Just answers the question in the title.
I am still surprised about the results. I am hosting on a German provider netcup.de once a year they have special offers for de-domains, on average 1,66€/year. My cheapest is for 1,44€/year (plus 2€ setup once), and price is fixed. So it's not a 10 year comittement, but auto-renewal every year, so last ten years I paid overall 16,40€ (so ~16.60 USD) for a de-TLD without any limitations.
10 year maintenance schedules are practically guaranteed to cause an outage.
If you have to perform a maintenance task once every 10 years, you will not remember to do it (reminder mechanisms are not really designed and tested for such long intervals).
It’s also extremely unlikely that all the business entities involved will still be in their current form. It’s possible that the new business will have lost the information reach out to you to remind you. You might have moved, changed email or phone numbers.
You might have died, your family depends on the domain, and they lose their email one day because the MX record expired.
The whole industry can change in just a few years; 10 year renewal seems like a bad idea to me.
If you have to perform a maintenance task once every 10 years, you will not remember to do it (reminder mechanisms are not really designed and tested for such long intervals).
It’s also extremely unlikely that all the business entities involved will still be in their current form. It’s possible that the new business will have lost the information reach out to you to remind you. You might have moved, changed email or phone numbers.
You might have died, your family depends on the domain, and they lose their email one day because the MX record expired.
The whole industry can change in just a few years; 10 year renewal seems like a bad idea to me.
I wouldn’t recommend renewing your domain every ten years, but I do always purchase my domains for ten years and subsequently renew every single year. That gives me a modicum of safety from certain life circumstances (e.g., there’s an HN commenter who lost access to his email due to a stint in prison).
It would hurt a lot more if the domain names in the post suddenly become a lot more expensive after 10 years. I don't know if there's an upper limit to what they can charge.
[deleted]
Just sell TLDs. Why are we not surfing to `.google` and `.apple`?
Most of the current TLDs are a waste. My clients all want .com addresses because that’s what “customers understand”.
Most of the current TLDs are a waste. My clients all want .com addresses because that’s what “customers understand”.
I've had people tell me my website doesn't work for them. It always turns out to be because they've appended ".com" to it.
> A typical .uk domain will set you back the thick end of a hundred quid if you want it for a decade! Can I find something cheaper?
The wholesale price for .uk domains is £3.90/year[0] so where does the £100 for ten years figure come from?
[0] https://www.nominet.uk/change-to-uk-domain-wholesale-prices/
The wholesale price for .uk domains is £3.90/year[0] so where does the £100 for ten years figure come from?
[0] https://www.nominet.uk/change-to-uk-domain-wholesale-prices/
Because most registrars buy wholesale and sell retail.
I looked at a couple of my normal registrars and they were about a tenner per year per .uk domain.
If you can find one for under a fiver (for multi year) please let me know.
I looked at a couple of my normal registrars and they were about a tenner per year per .uk domain.
If you can find one for under a fiver (for multi year) please let me know.
> If you can find one for under a fiver (for multi year)
"At cost" (allegedly):
https://www.cloudflare.com/products/registrar/
"At cost" (allegedly):
https://www.cloudflare.com/products/registrar/
DNS is a scam and has been from the start. It’s just SEO with the gravitas of ICAN and the combined biz ethos of payday lending and rental furniture. Just market your IPv6 and self-sign your certs. Provide a hosts file for people who really want to type something in to Mosaic but don’t know how.
FreeDNS has the following subdomains: https://freedns.afraid.org/domain/registry/
I do not remember how often you need to renew, but I do know that their service is not maliciously commercial like Freenom.
I do not remember how often you need to renew, but I do know that their service is not maliciously commercial like Freenom.
The price for .stream seem to have been adjusted. Now it costs $45.90 for 10 years on Porkbun.
Not sure about the cheapest one, but I know the most expensive one is any domain that you register at an unsecure registrar.
If the domain is stolen, it will end up potentially costing you thousands to get it back. And that’s if you don’t use it for a website.
If the domain is stolen, it will end up potentially costing you thousands to get it back. And that’s if you don’t use it for a website.
On mydomain.com, .feedback domains are nearly $400/year.
.feedback operates a two-tier system. The cheap domains have to use their web-hosting platform, which is pretty limited.
If you want to use it as a real domain, you have to pay a premium price.
If you want to use it as a real domain, you have to pay a premium price.
Thanks. That is good to know. By what mechanism does this arrangement come into play?
Cue domain getting unregistered under BS excuses.
I'd be more worried by the registrar stealing your domain once it becomes successful. Does that happen in practice?
I have registereda few .ovh domains for next to nothing. Was it one or two euro a year?
How about .mobi the author used. You have to eat your own food.
The .feedback problem is more I like to have a domain for a static site under github. I do not mind basic hosting service. But it is nicer if I just escape it to the github one.
For decade … I probably would be gone or not active. Done it guys. Hence no concern.
The .feedback problem is more I like to have a domain for a static site under github. I do not mind basic hosting service. But it is nicer if I just escape it to the github one.
For decade … I probably would be gone or not active. Done it guys. Hence no concern.
Blazor WebAssembly might be your pick, there's a starting template, write the front-end in c# and everything else in HTML and CSS as usual.
It's such a breeze developing even complex webapps with it like my project collanon.app
It's such a breeze developing even complex webapps with it like my project collanon.app
If you can, just stick to .com, .net, or the ccTLD of your country.