[HN Gopher] .club domains are not resolving
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       .club domains are not resolving
        
       Author : sergiomattei
       Score  : 48 points
       Date   : 2021-10-07 16:25 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.reddit.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.reddit.com)
        
       | asddubs wrote:
       | .ws has been down a few times this year too
        
       | jaywalk wrote:
       | More accurate title: .club domains _were_ not resolving. Looks
       | like this issue was fixed hours ago.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | 1MachineElf wrote:
       | A lot of the newish gTLDs are relatively expensive, but .club is
       | typically below $20/yr.
        
       | collegeburner wrote:
       | We should not have a domain system. Any person should be able to
       | register any domain just like with the left half, like I should
       | be able to get hi.lolthisdomaindoesntexist as a domain. I should
       | get it straight from ICANN for a low flat fee. This is how we fix
       | the sketchy registrars and "premium domain" nonsense.
       | 
       | </Rant>
       | 
       | Edit: fixed wrong word
        
         | rudian wrote:
         | I agree with the "straight from ICANN" part. Having a private
         | entity maintain your address is not unlike
         | yourname.someoneelse.com, you're at their whim.
        
           | collegeburner wrote:
           | Also I see no reason why ICANN has given out the right to
           | sell these domains to private companies that do nothing but
           | seek extra rent on the ICANN domain price. Let alone why
           | governments were given control of the two letter domains, so
           | ly can kick you off if Lybia thinks you have something
           | objectionable.
        
             | duskwuff wrote:
             | Because ICANN doesn't want to be in the business of running
             | a couple hundred domain registries. They are not _at all_
             | equipped to do that, either on a technical or a staffing
             | level.
        
         | jakedata wrote:
         | I was an early user of the .storage TLD and registered a domain
         | for three years. Fortunately I did not build my core business
         | around that particular domain - a new registrar took it over
         | and wants thousands of dollars for the renewal. I don't think
         | there is much if any protection for predatory pricing on gTLD
         | renewals.
        
           | DaveExeter wrote:
           | homeboy.storage   $550.18 /year       homeboy.storage
           | $999.99 for the first year
           | 
           | Ha ha ha! Crazy price. Second one is godaddy.
        
           | yabones wrote:
           | The inconvenient reality of domain "ownership" is that you
           | don't own anything at all. You rent it, and there's no
           | control on increases or fees like other types of rent/lease.
           | It's sort of like renting a car for a year and being
           | surprised you don't have any equity when you turn it back in.
        
         | collectordrx wrote:
         | Sure, I agree with the principal of the idea. Decentralization
         | is always a great thing and having a few gatekeepers for the
         | popular TLDs is not ideal. In reality though I am not sure how
         | this would work from a DNS perspective. If anyone can define a
         | TLD, you would need mappings of those at a DNS root level. This
         | is a pretty high burden on the root resolvers. You would almost
         | need to decentralize the root functionality of DNS. This would
         | pretty much take a rewrite of how DNS clients function as root
         | resolvers are normally hard coded in. Anyone have thoughts?
        
         | Tajnymag wrote:
         | Wouldn't domain squating be even worse that way?
        
           | collegeburner wrote:
           | Domain squatting could be a problem, but we would have less
           | of one with "investors" who speculate on "premium" domains.
           | My mistake typing wrong word above, I've fixed it.
        
       | nso wrote:
       | Caused by Neustars DNS being down for 3 hours
        
       | lostgame wrote:
       | Fun fact: The only reason I was even aware .club is even a TLD
       | was from when I signed up for Daft Punk's 'Daft Club' way back in
       | the early '00's.
       | 
       | I got a membership card in, I believe - my copy of 'Discovery'.
        
         | CydeWeys wrote:
         | .club was launched in 2014, so it wouldn't have been used for
         | that.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | type0 wrote:
       | Any metrics on what TLDs are more unreliable than others and
       | which one should avoid?
        
         | skim_milk wrote:
         | I made the mistake of buying a .co.de domain and putting my
         | professional email on it. One time it was down for a couple of
         | days, no .co.de domains would resolve and I couldn't get my
         | emails, so I took it upon myself to find out who to contact and
         | actually got them to fix it. Now they've improved and my email
         | is down due to DNS issues only a few hours every quarter!
         | 
         | Reliability is really bad for rare gLTD's, I would say don't
         | even bother. Keep important systems on .com and friends.
        
           | zamadatix wrote:
           | .co.de is just a standard SLD you could have owned and
           | operated if you had registered it like any other domain
           | first. A gTLD requires significant up front investment and
           | review+approval from ICANN after demonstration you have the
           | technical capacity to run it, as well as being an actual top
           | level domain.
           | 
           | Not that every gTLD is the pinnacle of reliability (see this
           | post) but your experience with a generic SLD isn't indicative
           | of anything in this case.
        
           | foepys wrote:
           | Aren't a lot of ccTLDs and most new gTLDs nowadays hosted by
           | a few big DNS providers? When .io was found to be vulnerable
           | to a takeover attack a few years ago they switched to one of
           | those providers. I don't know which, though.
        
           | Tepix wrote:
           | .co.de is just a random 2-letter domain
           | 
           | We only have .de as TLD in Germany and everything below it is
           | anarchy.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-10-07 23:02 UTC)