Top-level domains rethought

Despite my promise last week to discuss what it takes to insulate your privacy from the world's prying eyes, something important has just been decided that I feel compelled to comment on.

At a meeting in Paris the board of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) voted unanimously to 'relax' the rules about which top-level domains (TLD) can be created. In other words, the ICANN board decided the existing TLDs aren't enough and that more should be created.

The current TLDs include .com, .org, .net, .gov, .mil and .edu, country TLDs such as .us, .uk, .tv, etc., and newer bizarre additions such as .info, .coop, .museum, and .pro (that's for "professions" as opposed to, well, whatever else you might have thought).

To continue reading, register here and become an Insider. You'll get free access to premium content from CIO, Computerworld, CSO, InfoWorld, and Network World. See more Insider content or sign in.

Despite my promise last week to discuss what it takes to insulate your privacy from the world's prying eyes, something important has just been decided that I feel compelled to comment on.

At a meeting in Paris the board of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) voted unanimously to 'relax' the rules about which top-level domains (TLD) can be created. In other words, the ICANN board decided the existing TLDs aren't enough and that more should be created.

The current TLDs include .com, .org, .net, .gov, .mil and .edu, country TLDs such as .us, .uk, .tv, etc., and newer bizarre additions such as .info, .coop, .museum, and .pro (that's for "professions" as opposed to, well, whatever else you might have thought).

ICANN's solution to bolster the TLD ranks is to allow any organization with $150,000 to $500,000 (yes, you read that right) to register the TLD of their choosing. This means you'll see TLDs such as .microsoft and .oracle but .gibbs? Not a chance.

Let's see, we've had 15 years of the current TLDs and the system works pretty well. Sure, there are problems but, here's the thing, just having more of the same will simply compound those problems, not fix them. More TLDs that simply exist to cater to the wants of the rich while allowing registrars to make more money selling and managing them are not a good idea.

Let's consider the most recently added domains that were introduced with such pomp and circumstance. Take the .museum TLD: When was the last time you entered a URL that ended in .museum? I'm guessing never. And what's so great about the whole .museum TLD is it means nothing. It's not solely a realm for real museums; the TLD is as commercialized as any other domain!

For example, there's "The Museum of the American Cocktail" – americancocktail.museum – that is sponsored by a flotilla of alcohol companies and which offers seminars in "mixology." I'm all for any kind of museum, but let's not pretend that this is a serious museum like, say, the Getty or the Louvre. And you know what? The .museum TLD is irrelevant to them anyway! For all practical purposes, "The Museum of the American Cocktail" uses a URL in the .org TLD!

So, ICANN let the world have the .museum TLD along with .mobi (for mobile devices), .tel (for communications services), and .job (for companies with jobs available rather than recruitment companies). In other words it allowed a completely random, eccentric and politically motivated set of choices.

And let's not kid ourselves, politics already plays a huge role in ICANN's decision making. Consider its lame reasoning for not approving the .xxx TLD: the board didn't want to be in the business of regulating content. As if all of the other new domains weren't doing exactly that!

Moreover, have you heard any complaints from any organization about not being able to do business without being in the TLD .machinetools, .plastic or .anhydroussulfate? No, of course not. Even if there was a real demand for these custom TLDs why would the ICANN board or anyone with a clue think these should only be available to a select few with deep pockets?