.name Termination

doublepg23

I didn't even know I was using .name incorrectly...

xyst

Verisign is the worst. Hope author wins

swiftcoder

That's pretty shit. You'd think changes like this would need to go through a public comment period with the affected users (much like city planning decisions do)

eleventen

> Minutes after my daughter was born, I also registered beverly.fraser.name. ...minutes?

mchesters

Wow, they were extremely laziest in the request form too. Most answers are just a few words. > 3.6. Have you communicated with any of the entities whose products or services might be affected... > "No. Not applicable."

xyzzy_plugh

> Despite the fact that it's registered and paid for until 2040 How is this possible? I thought there was a 10 year limit.

ipython

From the Verisign application [0] for this change: > 2.1. What effect, if any, will the proposed service have on the life cycle of domain names? > None. There will not be any effect on the life cycle of domain names. ehhh, how is that possibly true? This change ( deleting all third level names) by definition affects the lifecycle of domain names ... by terminating them! Many years ago I wrote articles bringing attention to the negative effects of Verisign's SiteFinder [1] - if you don't remember this, it's when Verisign hijacked NXDOMAIN by redirecting any unresolvable domain to a site they owned and controlled. [0] https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/consensus-policies/rsep-2... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Site_Finder

noja

ICANN approved this.

Ecco

Ok I don’t get it. Why not register `fraser.nameˋ directly? Or pick any TLD and register ˋ a 2nd-level domain (ˋfraser.tld`)? It just feels easier, plus this way you don’t have to pay for any new member of your family?

NewJazz

You might want to write to the CA attorney general. Former AG Xavier Becerra was able to dissuade ICANN from letting the .org fuckery happen, maybe Bonta could try to strong arm ICANN in this case.

akersten

It kind of seems like an insane TLD structure to begin with, right? I always thought .co.uk was bad (you're just pinning yourself to whoever owns the .co. part, but at least browsers have some suffix list where you can't, I don't know, hijack some login cookie for all of .co.). Joe Smith and John Smith can independently register joe.smith.name and john.smith.name, do browsers have a wildcard suffix list for the 2nd level of `.name` specifically, or can Joe set a cookie on all of .smith.name?

nubinetwork

> Once the 3rd-level domains are terminated, it is assumed that the now vacant 2nd-level domains will become available for registration. Should someone (other than me) scoop up fraser.name (...) What's to stop someone from doing that, and keeping the status quo? Sure, it might be expensive, but pool together a few frasers for the initial buy, and make the money back on the sublets.

wmf

Discussion from yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49516047

pmdr

> I had history with Verisign and did not trust them. I don't know what that history is, but did it really make a tld used by only 22k people more appealing?

jawns

Surely the author must have anticipated some heightened level of risk in pegging important parts of his personal and business life on a nonstandard TLD like this. It's a pretty bizarre exception to the normal, intuitive ways that domains work. I'll admit that it's a crappy situation and I would be frustrated in his place. But if I were in his place, I probably would have also thought it prudent to have a backup plan.

arjie

We were rescued from that dot org scam by the fact that ICANN is a California non profit. I wonder if the AG can lean on them again. This is an outrageous thing to do.

decimalenough

I've had a .name domain forever and I had no idea first.last.name was even a thing, meaning that it was possible to register this without owning last.name. That said, my domain is simply unusual.name, and everybody in my family has email addresses in the form first@unusual.name. So this is a no-op for me, and I gather www.unusual.name will also continue to work, since I own the 2nd level outright.

chanux

I kind of assumed .name was a product of relatively new TLD explosion [1] [1] https://blog.asmartbear.com/free-markets-bad/ Gotta wonder what other possible disasters introduced with gTLDs.

delduca

I never bet in any other than .com, .org, .net?

nneonneo

It seems like the right thing they should do is discontinue new registrations but continue to honour existing ones (+ continuing to reserve any 2LD that has a 3LD registered on top). It’s a bit insane that they can decide to just terminate all existing 3LD registrations. One would hope that they’d at least continue to reserve the 2LDs for some period to avoid domain squatting, but this isn’t mentioned in the proposal and I doubt Verisign would graciously do so.