5 ms·
This is exactly one of the concerns I mentioned: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5353171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5353171. It is already exhibi
by rehashed 13y ago
This is exactly one of the concerns I mentioned: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5353171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5353171. It is already exhibited by other controllers of TLDs: http://ydal.de/a-records-on-top-level-domains/ http://ydal.de/a-records-on-top-level-domains/
I havent received a reply yet to my request to reopen the public discussion on the new gTLDs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5351335 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5351335. I'll be chasing up on it today - I would appeal to the rest of you to do the same and help stop these gTLDs ever seeing the light of day.
- rehashed 13y agohttp://AI/ http://AI/ has address 209.59.119.34 http://BO/ http://BO/ has address 166.114.1.28 http://CM/ http://CM/ has address 195.24.205.60 http://DK/ http://DK/ has address 193.163.102.24 http://GG/ http://GG/ has address 87.117.196.80 http://JE/ http://JE/ has address 87.117.196.80 http://KH/ http://KH/ has address 203.223.32.21 http://PN/ http://PN/ has address 80.68.93.100 http://TK/ http://TK/ has address 217.119.57.22 http://TO/ http://TO/ has address 216.74.32.107 http://UZ/ http://UZ/ has address 91.212.89.8 http://VI/ http://VI/ has address 193.0.0.198 http://WS/ http://WS/ has address 64.70.19.33