Domain name tld's to be surpassed by...

[domaingenius]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051125/wr_nm/internet_domains_nodotcom_dc

 

[meinthecorner]

I'm getting an error loading that page:

Sorry, Unable to process request at this time -- error 999.

 

[domaingenius]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051125/wr_nm/internet_domains_nodotcom_dc

 

[meinthecorner]

I am sure there was something similar to this some years ago. However you needed some additional software on your PC to make the domain work?

 

[domaingenius]

It seems they have set up around 13 DNS around the World this time so no need for software, but just uptake by ISP's

http://www.unifiedroot.com/corporate

DG

 

[retired_member27]

Very interesting article, this is exactly how I see the internet going, essentially it's saying that you will own your own tld. And the fact that large companies like Tiscali are signing up to it means that it could well take off. IMO, you will see a very different internet in 10 to 20 years time.

Personally, I think it's good for the internet because it takes control away from ICANN and the US, but bad because it will make the price of old tld domains (.com, .co.uk, etc) plummet. But just as quickly a new market will rise from the sell of .shop, .car, .loan, .anything, etc.

If it does take off there are going to be a lot of unhappy domain portfolio owners.

 

[domaingenius]

A friend of mine has just bought 15 tld's from them and just gonna wait and see if it takes of.

DG

 

[robrob is verified member.]

Anyone want to buy domains from me? I can make ebay.com point to your own site for only £1000 ... you and a few others will be the only ones to see it, but potentially millions could

This lot failed last year by trying an 'open dns' system, ie. individuals run their own DNS servers however they found out soon enough that it would be open to abuse and at the end of the day there has to be a central authority. They cannot get any control / buy shares in icann so.... they go for the DIY option!

They are basically setting up a 'independant' yet privately owned company to run a similar product to icann. So, if this takes off there will be an identical situation as there currently is with icann , but this time it will be a privately owned company.

It is the usual thing, I can create .rob locally, I can run servers to use my DNS but at the end of the day I want the rest of the internet to talk to me so I use .co.uk

The site explains that they are only doing it to offer a wider choice and to make things more findable, ie. instead of going to google and searching 'flowers' you would go to basingstoke.flowers etc , or if you were looking for wine, you would visit www.red.wine . Personally I would bet with google on that battle

A friend of mine has just bought 15 tld's from them and just gonna wait and see if it takes of.

I hope that is a joke, $15,000 of reg fees for this is not really a risk more just chucking money away.

There are loads of companies (dead and alive) eg. name.space who offer(ed) this product. It is like a marketing bloke had DNS explained to him while having coffee with a VC.

Personally, I think it's good for the internet because it takes control away from ICANN and the US

Very true, however it puts control in private companies, how is that better?

Ideally icann is formally placed under UN control or something so the internet control is globally controlled.

Ideas like unifiedroot.com have been tried and failed, mainly due to take up, but also as it as a solution is no better in any way than what is there already and are just people making a quick buck without technical knowhow on the problems it will cause, or perhaps they are aware but just want the cash

Worth having a nose at RFC2826 ... which sums up quite well:

Put simply, deploying multiple public DNS roots would raise a very
strong possibility that users of different ISPs who click on the same
link on a web page could end up at different destinations, against
the will of the web page designers.

This does not preclude private networks from operating their own
private name spaces, but if they wish to make use of names uniquely
defined for the global Internet, they have to fetch that information
from the global DNS naming hierarchy, and in particular from the
coordinated root servers of the global DNS naming hierarchy.

 

[retired_member27]

I see your point Rob, basically if a rival to unifiedroot.com set up there own DNS root servers around the world, and depending on which ISP has which root server configured "www.red.wine" could resolve to two different website.

The problem for unifiedroot.com is that they have no power to stop any number of rivals setting up their own root servers, and until that happens then DG I'm afraid your mate might have wasted his $15,000.

If however unifiedroot.com was the ONLY one and all ISP's agreed to include the new DNS roots then it could definitely work.

 

[robrob is verified member.]

If however unifiedroot.com was the ONLY one and all ISP's agreed to include the new DNS roots then it could definitely work.

Very true, however if you set one up, I set one up and both sold .genius for $1000 a go so domain.genius can be used... then the root that 'wins' is the one with the most users... thus going round to a good reason to stick with whats here. There are other companies offering the same 'register your own tld' , the only difference is that this claims to recognise icann and so will not offer .com etc, but what if icann do what they did with .biz? ie. introduced a tld that was already being used by a similar style company to unifiedroot.com , conflicts again

I completely agree that icann should not be a closed shop with a single country with the main infulence, thus the UN approach would be the best bet.

There was a great interview with Tim Berners-Lee recently explaining something similar, and the fact the web only worked as it was open and anyone can chuck a web page up. The infrastructure is the same , at the base level it needs to be open and 'free' otherwise it fractures and there will be lots of mini-internets which by definition is not what its all about

Incidently, if you read the older versions of unifiedroot's webpages (from its earlier incarnations) it used to use the new.net 'download a patch' system, claiming that it would 'enable internet2' on users computers! Internet2 is generally known as the stupidly high speed network being created between universitys, not really the same as a dodgy dns patch for a home user system.

Not really relevant technically speaking, but if they are happy to muddle matters for users in such a way I wouldn't want them to run a root

I think we ought to get a few gullible VC's together, give them numbers of .com registered and tell them they can open it up to loads more.... hawaii for christmas

 

[domaingenius]

Rob ,i must say that I do agree that this is a big gamble and I have said that to my friend. I have explained all this to him and said that the only way it will ever become big is if a substantial number of ISP's take it up and change their root servers will it b worthwhile. What I think may happen, and correct me please of I am technically or otherwise wrong, is that a region, say for example Middle East, will decide that they like the idea ,hate ICANN and USA and decided to get all the region's ISP's to change their root servers to this new one .Then I am presuming that the Middle East will have a kind of large intranet , is that about right ??.

DG

 

[robrob is verified member.]

Why would this new company suceed over the several that have gone before, and no doubt will pop up in the future?

Again it is the problem if they go down this road people will have a splintered internet that will not work properly for consumers.

The hypothetical situtation could occur, however is no more likely now than it has been previously and there are reasons why it failed before

 

[SFSF is verified member.]

Interesting posts guys thanks!