The 1.111B class of $0.99 .xyz domains white paper(aydacfu.xyz) |
The 1.111B class of $0.99 .xyz domains white paper(aydacfu.xyz) |
1. This is basically just a strategy for XYZ to generate tons of new revenue from otherwise junk domains ($0.99 * 1.11B names = $1,098,900,000)
2. We don't need to charge for domain names to allow a wider array of applications to communicate using personalized global addressing.
E-mail is the standard example: throwaway984393@mailprovider.com does not cost me anything at all, but it's personalized. Mail provider has to pay for a domain, but nobody else needs to. This kind of free personalized addressing is a design choice. In fact, you don't even need to use DNS at all, as many peer-to-peer networks (Bitcoin, IPFS, BitTorrent/Gnutella/Napster, YaCy, Usenet, etc) have shown.
A 3rd potential problem with this proposal is that if it were expanded to other TLDs, it may generate significantly more traffic for the DNS root.
Getting a domain is not prohibitively expensive if you have low standards for the url (which presumably you do if "93736474.xyz" works)
So the inevitable result is that a large number of applications using these will be so low effort they couldn't get a much better domain for barely more money, and that will probably end up being a mix of spam, malicious applications, and questionable content.
And the end result is everyone blocking traffic from .xyz. Just like someurl@extracheaphosting.com is.
finally every famous fake phone number could have a domain https://www.steveharveyfm.com/content/2017-05-30-12-songs-wi...
If you want to assign IoT devices unique domain names, don't start with someone else's TLD. Provision your own and assign based on a database.
Imagine ".device" as a TLD, where every domain maps to a device. You could sell them at $0.01/domain and let the registration last forever.
Provision entire blocks of them, even.
Does that not defeat the purpose?
I mean an IP address is numbers too. Who point of url names is to make it more human readable
Am I getting cynical? Seems like no businesses are going to use this recommended price.
It wasn't until college that I had enough available resources to buy a domain, and at the time I went ahead and bought 5 years. I probably missed out on 3 or 4 years of my life when I had virtually unlimited time to work on things like programming. Had $1 domains existed in 1997, I'd probably have ended up as a PHP/Perl guy, and gone on an entirely different life route.
Nowadays I have six or seven domains, two for public facing stuff, and the rest are for a rotating cast of personal projects where subdomains don't make a lot of sense. But my life wasn't always like this where I can afford multiple vanity domains. For big chunks of the world, $10/year is a significant startup cost when AWS and GCP have free tiers.
“Following the acquisition by SAIC, the NSF gave Network Solutions authority to charge for domain name registrations. Network Solutions imposed a charge of $100 for two years registration. 30% of this revenue went to the NSF to create an "Internet Intellectual Infrastructure Fund." In 1997, a lawsuit was filed charging Network Solutions with antitrust violations with regard to domain names. The 30% of the registration fee that went to the NSF was ruled by a court to be an illegal tax. This led to a reduction in the domain name registration fee to $70 (for two years).”
These days there are so many free DynDNS services out there that I don't know if a $1 domain on some weird TLD is that enticing.
The internet was already getting rather important by 1997, but true that it was a couple years away from the general public’s consciousness.