Google Registry | Hacker News Reader

Google Registry

charlestonroadregistry.com

67 pointsjganetsk48 comments

If the top-level domain of a website can now be chosen from any number of 2-3 character combinations (i.e. other than "com"), reducing chances of it having each URL be "guessable", then why bother with top-level domains at all?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_top-level_doma...

One reason: there can only be so many root nameservers, which are capable of only so much traffic. Additional layers help keep DNS decentralised.

Get ready for your online identity to be https://104233435224873922474.plus/

Google is arguably the most web-focused company in the world (the other contender being Mozilla). So how the hell did they manage to screw up something as basic as URLs on Google+? (I've always liked the elegance of twitter.com/username)

Even worse, when they assigned "good" URLs they gave this horrendous preference to .coms and didn't allow any changes.

For instance, say there's an empty domain at yourbusiness.com, but you're operating on yourbusiness.co.uk, the domain you get is the horrendous "yourbusinesscouk". whilst "yourbusiness" goes completely unused.

Jerks.

You may have missed this: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/you-can-now-finally-get-a-vanit...

It doesn't matter. At this point, the web is already polluted with millions of horrible URLs that will/should never change.

There is a custom URL feature for plus accounts. Eg. https://google.com/+YourFullName. I guess, they are reserving the urls for unique names. I got mine https://google.com/+AlokMandavgane

I'm surprised by this choice of domains; many of them don't seem to be very appealing for either businesses or individuals. How many people would really want .foo, .boo or .soy?

It will cost Google $185k/yr to run each of these gTLDs. Given that, I think we may know what some of Google's next shuttered projects will be. I wouldn't register a .soy domain (even for free) if I valued long-term presence.

Not to discredit Google's attempts here prematurely, but they are known for shutting down non-profitable/low-trafficked services.

Do they really have to pay if they're running their own root name servers?

According to the site[0], .foo is supposed to be for developers, .boo for scary stories, and .soy for spanish autobiographies.

Given how well .me and .info did (can't remember the last time I saw one of those) I can't see this gaining much traction at all.

[0] http://charlestonroadregistry.com/domains.html

.me is Montenegro's country TLD.

Coming soon: traderjoes.soy birkenstock.soy wholefoods.soy

...and so on

I would like EXE for top level domain; that would create lots of questions, like is this url a virus?

That's really no different from .com ... Except for that people seem to have forgotten about the .com executables file extension.

Does "Google is planning on being the registry for these new top level domains" mean that if I want a .dad or .new domain name my only option is to buy it through Google? (or through a Google reseller)

It means they will control the root nameservers. They have the ability to choose who gets it and to what. In theory, they have no obligation to charge anyone.

So how do I control a root nameserver for a TLD?

You pay ICANN a lot of fucking money

For $185k you get to ask ICANN for a tld. If they accept, I believe it's an additional $185k per year. Not sure if you get your money back if they refuse.

You don't.

Wow, that sounds like a racket.

I've been told it's $25K/yr ongoing.

It's relatively easy.

  1. Download the root.zone file.  Add your new TLD to it, _but don't change anything else_.

  2. Configure and run the necessary DNS software (e.g., nsd, tinydns, etc. plus dnscache, or maybe pdns_recursor) on a computer with a publicly reachable IP address (a "server").  

  3. Tell your users the IP address of your server.  They can then change their DNS settings to point to your server.

You now control the root nameserver for a new TLD.

I run my own root.zone and DNS service for my devices at home and I have some custom TLDs. As such, I "control the root nameserver for a TLD". And I did not pay ICANN anything.

What gives ICANN their ability to make money from this stuff is that for some reason not many people run their own root.zone.[1] Almost everyone points their DNS caches at the ICANN root.zone. Blind faith?

1. Running your own root.zone allows you to add or remove whatever TLDs or individual domainnames you wish. Quite a few people do desire the removal of individual domainnames, i.e., "filtering" and pay OpenDNS for this "service". You can accomplish this by running your own root.zone, for free.

To add to this OpenNIC[1] is a project encourages people to host their own name servers and even add additional TLDs to their DNS network.

[1]http://www.opennicproject.org/

Thank you.

Those GTLDs are applied by Google[1], so Google have full control on them. [1] https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applications...

At this point, what is the rationale behind limiting .TLDs anyway? Is it simply a means to create artificial scarcity so that the companies who control .TLDs can make money? Or is there a legitimate technical reason?

Here's a nice list: http://www.101domain.com/new_gtld_extensions.htm

If these become really popular won't they break a ton of code? "My email is hello.peeps@my.feedback"

Personally, I've seen users struggle with anything other than .com. I had a .net once and there were so many "I couldn't find your website" issues from users because it wasn't a .com.

I've had regexps reject my domain (3e.org) because it's "too short" or (more frequently) "domains cannot start with a number".

I don't particularly recognise any of the registrars. Does anyone have any experience they'd like to share, to help us choose?

  101Domain, Inc.
  Ascio Technologies
  DOMAINREGISTRY.DE
  EBrandServices
  eNom
  EuroDNS
  Interlink Co., Ltd.
  Key-Systems
  Mailcub SAS
  MarkMonitor
  Name.com
  Openprovider
  Super Registry Inc.

eNom is pretty well known

And IME, best avoided.

Markmonitor is very popular with enterprise folks for domain registry/management.

They are the type that charges $10,000 per year, but will make a bunch of phone calls and a background check before doing a transfer or a nameserver change.

Not sure they are relevant for the $10/year crowd.

I use 101Domain, especially for non-.com domains (.io, .ly, etc). It has worked well for me, but I haven't had to contact customer service for anything more serious than letting a domain lapse accidentally, which I got back with no hassle.

name.com is mentioned on hn a lot, not a personal user of it.

I use name.com for my half-dozen personal domains, and am yet to have any issues with them.

eNom I've only ever encountered while working for a web hosting company, and remember nothing but pain.

Interesting that .app isn't in their list of domains "Google is planning on being the registry" for.

I'm still haven't seen a .aero or .mobi once, ever.

I can imagine .ing being very popular however, much as .ly is now.

Yeah, wtf ever happened to .aero!? I see the occasional .info, but wasn't there also supposed to be a .museum?

Hurrah for someone actually doing something with TLDs.

There are a couple: https://www.google.com.au/search?q=site%3A.museum

I've just soft-launched a .travel: http://cycle.travel/

It's pretty much the only .travel I've ever seen, but the domain was just right for the content; it's memorable; and I figure that in an age where people find stuff via Google and not via an increasing number of obscure TLDs, the old "it must be .com" doesn't apply so much. (Probably the leading cycling site in the UK is road.cc, for "cycling club", and they seem to do fine.)

I just hope we can set reserve .dev as a loopback interface like 127.0.0.1 or 169.254.0.0/16.

ahhhh .com. The original bitcoin. Sort of?

.DAD but no .MOM?

Or .MUM?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com