.pork
ICANN is to the internet what FIFA is to football.
ICANN opens applications for new generic top-level domains for the first time since 2012
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on Thursday kicked off a new application process for generic top-level domains (gTLDs), its first since 2012. The domain name system as we know it came into being thanks to RFC 920, penned by internet pioneers Jon Postel and Joyce Reynolds, which suggested …
-
-
Friday 1st May 2026 15:06 GMT doublelayer
Re: I don't think I've ever seen one...
I've seen them a few times. Several of those have been phishing sites. A few ones have been legitimate. For example, the Framework computer company probably couldn't get framework.[something normal], so they went with frame.work. I know a few places which created .dev or .app websites for software, especially open source software. These aren't the most common, but they do exist.
-
Friday 1st May 2026 10:04 GMT Anonymous Coward
Does anyone other than Google use .google? Or Microsoft use .microsoft? I thought the premise of a gTLD was they had to be open, for some value of 'open' meaning you had to be in the EU to get a .eu domain, in the US to get a .us domain, etc. I've been waiting a long time to see https://dont.use.google or https://stay.away.from.microsoft
-
Friday 1st May 2026 14:26 GMT frankvw
Are TLDs still relevant?
"...the commercial opportunities are endless..."
And therein lies the problem.
The initial idea behind top level domains was to have them impose some sort of hierarchy on what was until then a network with limited organization and structure. In the US that started with .com, .gov, .edu etc and Europe followed with country-based top level domains such as .uk, .de, .nl and so on. So you knew what you were dealing with: something.gov was an American government entity, company.nl was a business (or business subsidiary) located in the Netherlands, and so on. Simple. Clear. Straightforward.
But then commercial interests replaced common sense. Suddenly everyone could register anything regardless of organization type or location. I'm in South Africa but I've got a .com domain. Perplexity.ai is not located in Anguilla (they probably don't even know where Anguilla is) and netflix.tv is definitely not based on the Polynesian island of Tuvalu.
Which essentially means that top level domains are now useless. My wife can register xyz.yoga or xyzyoga.studio with equal facility. I can have mywomanfrom.tokyo registered one hour from now if I want to, and probably buyacheapamerican.visa as well (although I haven't tried that one yet).
So what, in the name of Zeus' butthole, is the point of having a TLD at all if it can be anything you want and doesn't tell anyone anything useful?
-
Friday 1st May 2026 15:14 GMT doublelayer
Re: Are TLDs still relevant?
I think they can still be relevant, but the new ones tend not to be. .com was never intended to be US-only, so I don't think it's a problem that you can get one, and nor do I think you should need to prove connection to a country to be able to register a domain there unless that country specifically wants that. Most of them didn't. People didn't tend to register a .nl unless they had a reason, and the reason was usually that they had or wanted to have a connection with the Netherlands, but I don't object if you think it looks cool so did so anyway. Similarly with .ai and .tv, which both belong to countries that can easily carve out some third-level domains for their tiny populations and prove residency or interest but earn money from the people who like the second-level.
The only utility the new TLDs from 2012 or the more new ones we're undoubtedly going to end up with so ICANN can get more money for... I don't know is that people can have domain names that look more normal until the TLD which looks abnormal. Given the low usage of most of these, I don't think that will be very useful.
-
Friday 1st May 2026 16:48 GMT R Soul
Re: Are TLDs still relevant?
The only utility the new TLDs from 2012 or the more new ones we're undoubtedly going to end up with so ICANN can get more money for...
ICANN only gets a cut of ~25c on each gTLD domain name that gets sold. The rest of the retail price of ~$25 or more goes to the registries and registrars. They're the real hucksters and profiteers behind the TLD scam. It's worse than multi-level marketing. Every time the sales of $TLD tail off, these scumbags put the screws on ICANN to create even more TLDs. And the circle of shite starts all over again.
There's no way to stop this or change it because the spivs control ICANN's policy-making machinery. They have the power and resources to shout down anyone who threatens their commercial interests^W^W^W^W disagrees with them. ICANN's board is powerless to intervene. It says and does nothing because they have to respect the "consensus" decisions of the community rather than do what's right for the common good of the Internet. Even when those consensus decisions are fucked up.
-
Friday 1st May 2026 19:03 GMT doublelayer
Re: Are TLDs still relevant?
ICANN gets that small per-domain fee, but they also get nearly a quarter of a million from each place that wants to have one and $24k yearly to keep it. That is quite a lot of money, especially for an organization that doesn't do very much. Many of the created TLDs turn out to be ones that some speculator thought would be successful but nobody buys them. Registries aren't innocent either, but I think ICANN is getting more money and is a bigger culprit than you're giving them credit for.
-
Tuesday 5th May 2026 13:30 GMT R Soul
Re: Are TLDs still relevant?
"they also get nearly a quarter of a million from each place that wants to have one"
Nope. That money got spunked up against the wall on consultants, lawyers, beancounters and other oxygen thieves who assessed the applications for new TLDs. ICANN gets/got none of that dosh. The TLD application process is/was revenue-neutral from their PoV. I think (but don't care) the application fees will be considerably lower for the upcoming round of this shit-show. ICANN won't see any of that either.
No matter. Anyone stupid and wealthy enough to apply for a new TLD deserves to be ripped off*. As they surely will. Fools and their money...
ICANN richly deserves criticism for filling up the DNS root with shit - tragedy of the commons and all that. It did that because it's in thrall to broken and corrupt processes. ICANN didn't fill the root with shit to make more money for themselves from domain name registration fees. If money had driven its decision-making this time, there would be no more new TLDs because almost all of the 1500 or so they created last time are loss-making shitfests. And there's no signs it'll be different next time.
* By consultants, lawyers, beancounters, hucksters, snake-oil salesdroids and other oxygen thieves, not ICANN.
-
-
-
-
Friday 1st May 2026 16:11 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Are TLDs still relevant?
"So what, in the name of Zeus' butthole, is the point of having a TLD at all if it can be anything you want and doesn't tell anyone anything useful?"
STFU! There's money to be made! Bottom feeding spivs make money fa$$$$t selling names in new TLDs and that's all that matters. Now don't ask awkward questions.
-
Saturday 2nd May 2026 13:45 GMT Pete Sdev
Re: Are TLDs still relevant?
I understand what you mean, however I'd point out that there are still a couple of TLDs with a geographic requirement in order to register. For example, .eu, .co.uk/.org.uk, .ie (IINM).
Which was one the minor effects of Brexit - British entities could no longer hold a .eu domain.
-
-
