RU version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
40% Positive
Analyzed from 1010 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#name#level#domain#domains#third#icann#email#service#verisign#tld
Discussion (28 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
I don't see how this is any different, other than the second-level domain owner delegates their registrar job to the first-level domain owner.
There is something weird though if you control smith.name, that you don't control john.smith.name. The DNS system does convey some indirect concept of responsibility.
In the RSEP it states:
> "Have you communicated with any of the entities whose products or services might be affected by the introduction of your proposed service? If so, please describe the communications."
> "No. Not applicable."
As thankful as I am to OP for bringing this to my attention; I am equally disappointed that my registrar (Fasthosts) has not made any attempt to warn me about this, and that Verisign consider me "Not applicable" to a change that will be extremely onerous.
90 days to transition is an extremely short period of time to transition literally every account I have, including email addresses I use for government and medical services.
contrary, this is one TLD _ceasing_ its idiosyncratic mode of operation.
I've managed multiple third-level domains for decades, and didn't realize this distinction between registry-managed domains and having the registry delegate third-level domains to the authoritative servers...the latter I'm quite used to, but this change is about the former.
I've never used .name, and while I was initially skeptical, it seems like this is a pretty reasonable move.
Basically, .name came out of us starting out as a webmail provider offering people to pick from ca. 60k domain names covering most common last names, because one of my co-founders and I both had firstname@lastname.tld email addresses.
When ICANN opened up for new TLDs we decided to try to offer the same more broadly.
So it wasn't just the registration, but initially also email forwarding..
None of the first batch of TLDs did as well as projected, and demand for .name was well below what we'd hoped, sadly.
For .name, it was a match of less demand than we thought and people not getting the third level thing, which led to eventually abandoning it as the main offering (after I'd moved on).
We ended up selling to Verisign a few years later.
It's an odd concept. I have to say I hadn't really thought of it before reading this.
(via https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/reconsideration-26-2-s...)
i've been a third level domain customer since 2006 not amused at all
Now, years later, they are undoing it and they're even breaking existing domains. ("existing third level domain names will be terminated") This kind of breaking change shouldn't be allowed.
That was the starting point - we started as a webmail provider letting people share lastname.sometld domains
Without that, it's just another name.
None. There will not be any effect on the life cycle of domain names."
Well, aside from deleting all of them. But no other effect on the life cycle.
"3.6. Have you communicated with any of the entities whose products or services might be affected by the introduction of your proposed service? If so, please describe the communications. No. Not applicable."
I guess communication is not applicable when you just cease a service.