eTLDs? ICANN to Take Bids for Common Extensions as TLDs

Feb 14, 2008 11:30 AM PST
Comments: 1
Views: 2,524

Internet addresses ending in popular extensions such as ".pdf", ".doc", or ".mp3" could appear under a new proposal by ICANN. However, ICANN said it would likely bar all-numeric suffixes, such as ".123". Once ICANN finishes crafting its criteria, it will start taking bids from outside companies and groups for new domain names, so a ".pdf" domain would appear only if an applicant comes forward and wins approval. The organization is looking for feedback on security and operational issues that may arise from the introduction of new domain names as early as this year.

Read Full Story: Associated Press

See Related Topics: DNS, Domain Names, Security, Top-Level Domains

This has been a featured post from CircleID Reporter. To stay updated with CircleID via Email, RSS, Mobile Handsets or Twitter, visit the CircleID Extras page.

Comments

Re: eTLDs? ICANN to Take Bids for Common Extensions as TLDs Gary Osbourne – Feb 15, 2008 12:51 AM PST

Has ICANN lost its mind, that is, the mind that hitherto has been under the control of their Intellectual Property puppetmasters? Adobe Systems has patents on .pdf (portable documentformat). I doubt they'll just bow out gracefully to someone else receiving that extension, even those with a demonstrable IP interest in 'pdf'. Sure .pdf is an open standard but…

And look at the legal fights over .mp3 so far, not even getting into whether mp3.com and mp3.* and mp3.*.* could make a claim to having earned the right to move up a level. ICANN is not known for having the wisdom of Solomon.

They'd really need it for the nest of IP vipers (thousands) coiled up in doc, check out uspto.gov regarding doc and *.

Even when fierce and furious snakes attacked thy people and the bites of writhing serpents were spreading death, thy anger did not continue to the bitter end; their short trouble was sent them as a lesson, and they were given a symbol of salvation to remind them of the requirements of thy law.
- Wisdom of Solomon 16:5-6, The Apocrypha

I think this means that Google will offer to buy ICANN, having already rendered it near meaningless. ICANN will reject it, enjoying their privileged and moneyed status and knowing they couldn't exist in the true private sector, and then Google will get hostile. We can dream.

I can see not allowing completely numeric extensions because of possible confusion with IP addresses, but I suspect that was more due to pressure from the same US gov't. reactionary ICANN puppetmasters who didn't want .xxx, they were really really peeved at the possibility of a .666. But enough tongue in cheek, the referenced AP article states in part

But the organization [ICANN] concluded it would be too difficult to keep track of which extensions [their examples: .mp3, .doc, .pdf, and .jpg] are popular enough to prohibit, and allowing them shouldn't confuse major Web browsers, which already assume that an address refers to a Web page rather than a computer file.

Famous last words. This is a recipe for disaster, even assuming browsers can tell the difference (the @ in the DNS address exploit was used by the black hats for years before that phishing hole was finally closed by major browser providers, with ICANN silent on the matter SFAIK), it is the end user we have to worry about. Am I clicking on a .doc file which should spawn MS Word or a similar app (or Adobe Reader or similar for .pdf, etc), or am I clicking on a hyperlink address? That's bad enough on a web-page, can you imagine it in an email or otherwise on an end-user's computer? If you can't, the black hats can, and will.

This is just another money grab by the insatiable ICANN, of course MicroSoft will bid (and I suspect that's a part of the story we haven't heard yet) on .doc. And we'll wind up with even more money (some of it ours) going to ICANN's lawyers. And so it goes. -g