Talk:Top-level domain

Sponsored TLD

Explanation of .aero .coop .museum is needed.

http://www.icannwiki.org/STLD

http://www.icannwiki.org/STLD_Renewals

Branded TLDs

Branded TLDs like ".google" probably need a section (along with their own page include controversies). ICANN has a page on their wiki, but it's very pro-brand TLDs:

https://icannwiki.com/Brand_TLD

It'd be a good starting source though. I'll try to work on this some time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumdog (talk • contribs) 22:27, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

.cx christmas islands

may anyone include the tld ".cx" for "christmas islands"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.183.76.244 (talk) 20:56, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Domain suffix

Domain suffix redirects to this page but the term is nowhere to be found in the article. Is Domain suffix a synonym for TLD? I believe Domain suffix has at least one other meaning --Kvng (talk) 21:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Domain suffix is not really part of the language used in the Domain Name System. I know of no definitive use of the term in standards documents, however, it has been used to stand for the rest of a FQDN, if only a host or lower level DNS label is known, i.e., example.com would be the domain suffix to use to resolve the host 'www' in the DNS. Only secondary sources, usually laymen writing, seem to use term as a synonym for TLD. Kbrose (talk) 22:16, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

The networking configuration dialogs in Windows use Domain suffix in the way you describe. At best there are multiple meanings of the term. I'll wait and see if anyone else has input before doing any editing --Kvng (talk) 22:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

The situation is unchanged since six years ago; it would be helpful if someone could add clarification of the terminology, or redirect Domain suffix more appropriately — perhaps to FQDN? Moreover, the term DNS suffix is also reasonably common, with, as far as I understand, the same meaning of the FQDN with the first label removed. PJTraill (talk) 09:10, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I redirected the term to the FQDN article and added an explanation. Kbrose (talk) 15:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Non-latin top domains

Owing to the decision at ICANN yesterday, there will soon be need for a new section here about TLDs written in non-latin alphabets. No doubt there will be quite some of these; already last year ICANN gave up its policy that there must be only a small, restricted list of non-national top domains. So in ten years we may likely have lots of top domains relatiing to different cities, churches, business sectors and interests. Would be interesting to hear what the first new top domains will be, and how it will affect the structure of the web. For one thing, won't this create new demands on the capacity of web browsers, web servers and keyboards, if you're native to one language but want to be able to visit or direct at web addresses written in another script, without necessarily copy-pasting the URL? /Strausszek (talk) 02:41, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

.ly vs. Libya ?

2011 Libyan uprising, Internet kill switch, Why Libya can't shut down bit.ly --Webmgr (talk) 09:02, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

translations or transliterations?

as it is:

"ICANN implemented a set of IDN top-level domains that are translations of the name example.test into each language's script."

as it should be (1): "(...) that are transliterations of the name example.test into each language's script."

as it should be (2): "(...) that are translations of the name example.test into each language." --Elvenmuse (talk) 04:39, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Bare-word domains

There's currently some controversy over whether top-level domains should be allowed in DNS as "bare words", that is, with no subdomain. With ICANN considering a huge new list of TLDs, many of which are company names, there will soon be corporate TLDs. Names from "APPLE" through "WALMART" are on the list. Whether putting "WALMART" into a browser gets WalMart's TLD or a search is currently being discussed by browser developers. --John Nagle (talk) 22:14, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

This is now occuring, eg http://wtf

See discussions here

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.157.18 (talk) 07:39, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Confusion over meaning

There seems to be widespread confusion over what a TLD is. Many people are using TLD to refer to a registered domain, before prefixes such as www. For example according to this Google Analytics documenation example-petstore.com and my-example-blog.com are examples of TLDs. --83.236.128.138 (talk) 12:14, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I absolutely question the ability of nerds to use spoken language with any better logic than they use to write and document code. You people need minders. The phrase from the article "domain is com" is false, IMO. The DNS article specifies that the string left of the dot is the "second-level domain name". I assert that "example.com" is a domain, and that "com" is not. Sadsaque (talk) 11:37, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Domain name seizures section

Is this particularly relevant to Top-level domains? 79.229.129.155 (talk) 20:53, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Nope. It belongs at domain name, where it is already included. I've removed it from this article. Mindmatrix 14:29, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Evaluative Domains Terminated?

The eleven Evaluative Internationalized Domains are no longer in the IANA Root Zone database at [[1]] or on the IANA active TLD list at [[2]] While I don't see an IANA announcement, it looks as though these domains have been terminated. The section of this wiki addressing those domains could either be deleted or moved to a historical section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.25.252.245 (talk) 16:11, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

__"Trees.xyz v Trees.com"__

It seems that commercial search engines do not archive material on non-.com sites. I don't know why this is.

In any case, the website trees.xyz is not about general interest in trees, but rather has prominently displayed that the domain trees.xyz may be for sale or lease. This is incorrect according to Top-level Domain standards as .com stands for commercial domains and I am seeking to have this fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmkstarr (talk • contribs) 01:09, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Proposed domains

On 13 June 2012 ICANN has revealed nearly 2,000 applications for new top-level domains, which
are expected to go live throughout 2013 after thorough examination.

At the very least, this needs to be updated to revise the future tense, and I suggest reclassifying it from "Proposed" to something more timely and appropriate.
☺ Dick Kimball (talk) 15:38, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

I've started a discussion in Template_talk:Generic_top-level_domains#Not_complete.3F, if anyone interested to discuss it. Bennylin (talk) 20:01, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

UNSPONSORED top-level domains, please add/describe in the article, encyclopedic value

UNSPONSORED are whithout "owner", where ICANN has a important role: old ones (.Com, .Org and .Net) and new ones (.Biz, .Info and .Name). --Krauss (talk) 08:52, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Privacy features etc.

Some of this info could be useful for the article: https://www.eff.org/files/2017/08/02/domain_registry_whitepaper.pdf --Nemo 13:04, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

BT Hubs

Article currently states: "BT hubs use the top-level pseudo-domain home for local DNS resolution of routers, modems and gateways." under Pseudo-domains. I think hub is supposed to refer to router, and I'm fairly sure that this isn't unique to BT devices. Should this be changed?

ThinkOkay (talk) 21:55, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

I confirm that my belgian router answers to "mymodem.home", but undocumented. So yes it isn't unique to BT devices... but where to find a good source for that obvious fact? 193.191.221.220 (talk) 08:26, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

How to list top-level domains

How to write a set of TLDs (top-level domains)? -- GreenC 01:43, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

In prose and section headers when discussing a set of TLDs.

Option 1 (no dot, no comma):

is it li vi

Option 2 (no dot, comma):

is, it, li, and vi

Option 3 (dot, no comma):

.is .it .li and .vi

Option 4 (dot, comma):

.is, .it, .li, and .vi

Extra credit: when .vi is the end of the sentence - include a full stop or not: .vi. -- GreenC 01:43, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Poll

• Option 2 or Option 3 Cleaner, shorter, easier to read, clearer when adding a full-stop. The sentence itself will include context they are TLDs thus the "." is redundant information. Update: Add option 3 as also viable. -- GreenC 01:43, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
• Option 3 They are referred to as "dot li" etc. and I think that should be reflected in the presentation. And not to suggest that the guideline is somehow intended for this kind of case, but just more as a general philosophy I think that removing the dot goes against the idea of WP:OR when it's really not necessary. The commas in option 4 feel like they are more likely to lead to confusion than elucidation, so I think they are not ideal. As for the end of the sentence, I would suggest that they either be clearly identified as a TLD in that case, e.g. "the .is .it .li and .vi top level domains." or to refactor the wording to stick the TLD list earlier in the sentence. VanIsaac, MPLL ^cont_WpWS 03:00, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
• Option 4 or 3, per Vanisaac. Whether a comma should be used is determined by other use of commas in the article (MOS:COMMAS), so we need a parameter for it. Templates do not set style guidelines but reflect them; trying to make the dictate style matters is WP:FAITACCOMPLI. Comma should be included by default for clarity (serial comma already dominates on WP, especially in complex or technical material).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  15:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
• Option 4 is the only one that makes sense to me. And yes the final period if at end of sentence. Dicklyon (talk) 16:32, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
• Option 4 seems the logical one. - Aoidh (talk) 18:50, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
• Option 4 seems the better choice. I agree that setting the examples off with caps not appropriate and with a different font less confusing. -- Otr500 (talk) 15:12, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
• Option 4 looks best to me and is clearest. VioletWTF (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:47, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

• Capitalise with a dot (.EXAMPLE)? Jmccormac (talk) 02:02, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Jmccormac sorry my RfC was malformed you comment ended up in the body of the RfC question my fault. I moved it to discussion but feel free to add to the poll section though I'd hope to get some clarity on the 4 options in particular when dealing with a list of TLDs. -- GreenC 02:14, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. In the light of day, there's another possible option that will solve some of the trailing dot issue. Use a different font for the tlds (Helvetica) so that they stand out from the body text. That way there will be less confusiuon. Jmccormac (talk) 16:37, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Use <code> or something e.g. .it. EEng 00:56, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn't cap .COM, .EDU, .MIL (the original TDSs?), etc. since that's not how they typically appear. On the other hand, I could accept if it people think that's a better way to set off TLDs. Dicklyon (talk)

The code tags would work. The capitalisation issue might be necessary with the 1,200 or so new gTLDs which often use common words as their gTLD. Using the code tags gets around that problem.Jmccormac (talk) 03:13, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

http://ai./ removal

http://ai./ is listed in examples of dotless domains. It is no longer a public site. My latest revision changed the description to note this, should we remove it entirely? VioletWTF (talk) 23:45, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

.internal

added ICANN proposal and request for feedback to the text. Hope that's ok. Please correct and maybe put to "proposed domains" if appropriate. Maybe this should be moved or copied to Proposed top-level domain? -- Schusch (talk) 12:17, 15 February 2024 (UTC)