Top-level domain: Difference between revisions
editorial beautification, plus an attempt to make clear that ICANNwiki is "unofficial" |
→Debated TLDs: gTLD MoU had .info, so that's seven, not six TLDs |
||
Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
==Debated TLDs== |
==Debated TLDs== |
||
About the time that [[ICANN]] |
About the time that [[ICANN]] discussed and finally introduced<ref>[http://www.internic.net/faqs/new-tlds.html InterNIC FAQs on New Top-Level Domains]</ref> <tt>[[.aero]]</tt>, <tt>[[.biz]]</tt>, <tt>[[.coop]]</tt>, <tt>[[.info]]</tt>, <tt>[[.museum]]</tt>, <tt>[[.name]]</tt>, and <tt>[[.pro]]</tt> TLDs, site owners and [[USENET]] users argued that a similar TLD should be made available for adult and pornographic websites to settle the dispute of obscene content on the internet and the responsibility of service providers under the questionable [[Communications Decency Act]] of 1996. Several options were proposed including <tt>[[.xxx]]</tt>, <tt>[[.sex]]</tt> and <tt>[[.adult]]</tt>, but so far ICANN chose not to create them. |
||
An older proposal<ref>[http://www.gtld-mou.org/docs/faq.html#2.1 (historical) gTLD MoU]</ref> consisted of seven new gTLDs <tt>.arts</tt>, <tt>.firm</tt>, <tt>[[.info]]</tt>, <tt>.nom</tt>, <tt>.rec</tt>, <tt>.shop</tt>, and <tt>[[.web]]</tt>. Later <tt>[[.biz]]</tt>, <tt>[[.info]]</tt>, <tt>[[.museum]]</tt>, and <tt>[[.name]]</tt> covered most of these old proposals. |
|||
<tt>[[.museum]]</tt>, and <tt>[[.name]]</tt>. |
|||
==TLDs in alternative roots== |
==TLDs in alternative roots== |
Revision as of 22:48, 30 May 2008
A top-level domain (TLD), sometimes referred to as a top-level domain name (TLDN), is the last part of an Internet domain name; that is, the letters which follow the final dot of any domain name. For example, in the domain name www.example.com, the top-level domain is com (or COM, as domain names are not case-sensitive). Management of top-level domains is handled by the ICANN.
The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) currently classifies top-level domains into three types:
- country code top-level domains (ccTLD): Used by a country or a dependent territory. It is two letters long, for example .us for the United States. With some historical exceptions, the code for any territory is the same as its two-letter ISO 3166 code.
- generic top-level domains (gTLD): Used (at least in theory) by a particular class of organizations (for example, .com for commercial organizations). It is three or more letters long. Most gTLDs are available for use worldwide, but for historical reasons .mil (military) and .gov (governmental) are restricted to use by the respective U.S. authorities. gTLDs are subclassified into sponsored top-level domains (sTLD), e.g. .aero, .coop and .museum, and unsponsored top-level domains (uTLD), e.g. .biz, .info, and .name.
- infrastructure top-level domains (iTLD): The top-level domain .arpa is the only confirmed one. .root has been known to exist without reason.
A full list of currently existing TLDs can be found at the list of Internet top-level domains.
Historical TLDs
A .nato was added in the late 1980s by the NIC for the use of NATO, who felt that none of the then existing TLDs adequately reflected their status as an international organization. Soon after this addition, however, the NIC created the .int TLD for the use of international organizations, and persuaded NATO to use nato.int instead. However, the nato TLD, although no longer used, was not deleted until July 1996.
Other historical TLDs are .cs for Czechoslovakia (now .cz for Czech Republic and .sk for Slovak Republic), .zr for Zaire (now .cd for Democratic Republic of the Congo), .oz for Australia (now .au) and .dd for the German Democratic Republic (now .de for Germany). In contrast to these, the TLD .su has remained in active use despite the demise of the Soviet Union that it represents, though .ru is most commonly used for Russian domains.
Commercial use of country code TLDs
A number of the world's smallest countries have licensed their TLDs for world-wide commercial use. For example, Niue, a tiny island in the South Pacific Ocean, has licensed the .nu TLD and it is used various places around the world, for example in Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden, where the word "nu" means "now". Similarly, Tuvalu and the Federated States of Micronesia, other small islands in the South Pacific, have partnered with VeriSign and FSM Telecommunications respectively, to sell domain names using the .tv and .fm TLDs to television and radio stations. Cocos (Keeling) Islands of Australia promoted the use of their .cc as "the next .com", which garnered popularity due to its relative cheapness compared to .com registration at the time.
Pseudo-domains
In the past the Internet was just one of many wide-area computer networks. Computers not connected to the Internet, but connected to another network such as BITNET, CSNET or UUCP, could generally exchange e-mail with the Internet via e-mail gateways. When used on the Internet, addresses on these networks were often placed under pseudo-domains such as .bitnet, .csnet, and .uucp; however these pseudo-domains implemented in mail server configurations such as sendmail.cf and were not real top-level domains and did not exist in DNS.
Most of these networks have long since ceased to exist, and although UUCP still gets significant use in parts of the world where Internet infrastructure has not yet become well-established, it subsequently transitioned to using Internet domain names, so pseudo-domains now largely survive as historical relics. One notable exception is the 2007 emergence of SWIFTNet Mail, which uses the .swift pseudo-domain.[1]
The anonymity network Tor has a pseudo-domain onion, which can only be reached with a Tor client because it uses the Tor-protocol (onion routing) to reach the hidden service in order to protect the anonymity of the domain.
.local deserves special mention as it is required by the Zeroconf protocol. It is also used by many organizations internally, which will become a problem for those users as Zeroconf becomes more popular. Both .site and .internal have been suggested for private usage, but no consensus has yet emerged.
Reserved TLDs
RFC 2606 reserves the following four top-level domain names for various purposes, with the intention that these should never become actual TLDs in the global DNS:
- .example — reserved for use in examples
- .invalid — reserved for use in obviously invalid domain names
- .localhost — reserved to avoid conflict with the traditional use of localhost
- .test — reserved for use in tests
In 2007 eleven IDN test TLDs were created:[2]
- .xn--kgbechtv Arabic
- .xn--hgbk6aj7f53bba Persian
- .xn--0zwm56d Chinese, simplified
- .xn--g6w251d Chinese, traditional
- .xn--80akhbyknj4f Russian
- .xn--11b5bs3a9aj6g Hindi
- .xn--jxalpdlp Greek
- .xn--9t4b11yi5a Korean
- .xn--deba0ad Yiddish
- .xn--zckzah Japanese
- .xn--hlcj6aya9esc7a Tamil
Debated TLDs
About the time that ICANN discussed and finally introduced[3] .aero, .biz, .coop, .info, .museum, .name, and .pro TLDs, site owners and USENET users argued that a similar TLD should be made available for adult and pornographic websites to settle the dispute of obscene content on the internet and the responsibility of service providers under the questionable Communications Decency Act of 1996. Several options were proposed including .xxx, .sex and .adult, but so far ICANN chose not to create them.
An older proposal[4] consisted of seven new gTLDs .arts, .firm, .info, .nom, .rec, .shop, and .web. Later .biz, .info, .museum, and .name covered most of these old proposals.
TLDs in alternative roots
ICANN's slow progress in creating new gTLDs, and the relatively high registration costs associated with several TLDs, contributed to the creation of alternate root servers. Alternative DNS roots have their own sets of TLDs. See that article for details. At times, browser plugins have been developed to allow access to some set of "alternative" domain names even when the normal DNS roots are otherwise used.
References
- Addressing the World: National Identity and Internet Country Code Domains, edited by Erica Schlesinger Wass (Rowman & Littlefield, 2003, ISBN 0-7425-2810-3) [1], examines connections between cultures and their ccTLDs.
- Ruling the Root by Milton Mueller (MIT Press, 2001, ISBN 0-262-13412-8) [2], discusses TLDs and domain name policy more generally.