Re: ICANN approves new top level domains

  • From: Neil Doane <caine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: technocracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 11:31:09 -0700

* Hunter (hunters@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) on [07-16-00 23:18] did utter:
> "ICANN (Internet Cooperation for Assigned Names and Numbers) voted to add
> an unspecified number of TLD to the current seven."
> I don't really like this. While it is probably a good idea to expand the
> TLDs, I don't like the deviation from the "standard". I expect to see either
> a 3 letter TLD or a 2 letter country code in my URLs, not something like
> ".union" or ".museum" (both of which were proposed). Also, creating a domain
> like .sex could stir up a whole hornets nest of 1st ammendment issues should
> somebody try to make it into virtual red-light district. (ie: banning prono 
> sites from .com et all)
> Anyone else care to comment?

*shrug*  I'm indifferent really.  I mean, it might be an interesting change. 
(What's I'd really rather see is something proposed to end cybersquatting,
for some reason that really bugs me.)  I wonder what the rationale was for
adding new domains?  Was it for organizational clarity or corporate
> BTW, what's #7? (.com .net .edu .org .mil & .gov was all I could think of)

Googling found, which says the last one is
".INT", for "organisations that were established by international treaty" 


       . /._ o /     --personal="caine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" 
      /|//- / /     --business="caine@xxxxxxxxxxx"
     / ''- / /__   --homepage="";
~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Other related posts: