This is topic Domains For FREE! in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=000087
Posted by Andrew McCrea (Member # 674) on 12-30-2000, 05:43 PM:
Does anyone know where I can get a free top-level domain name?Everyone I use to use has started taking plastic verification... And I don't have plastic!
Andrew McCrea
I'm Cute!
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-30-2000, 07:44 PM:
You can't get a free top-level domain (TLD). TLDs (.com,.net,.org,.edu,.gov,.mil, various country code TLDs, etc.) are currently being assigned by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN, http://www.icann.org/). The number of TLDs is expanded only rarely; the most recent expansion (which added such silly TLDs as .biz and .museum, neither of which really serves a useful purpose that isn't already being served by existing TLDs) required a non-refundable $50k deposit by any company which wanted to even propose a new TLD, as well as a substantial investment in hardware and network capacity in order to prove that they had the capacity to run the so-called "root nameservers" for the propsed TLDs.
If you're thinking of second-level domains (example.com, etc.), then you're probably also out of luck. It used to be possible to get a free name registration in the .us hierarchy, but I believe that this is no longer possible in most states. Before 1995, registrations in .com, .net, and .org were free, but they have cost money ever since then. Right now, you can register a second-level domain in .com, .net, or .org for something between $10 and $70. Be warned that you'll need to provide (or pay someone else to provide) at least two working "name servers" -- i.e. computers with full-time net connections and static IP addresses which will provide DNS information for your domain. These machines should be on separate networks and be geographically separate as well. Beyond that, you'll need to provide (or pay someone else to provide) whatever services you want to offer (mail, web, ftp, etc.) for that domain name.
There are companies which will provide 'virtual domain hosting' for $10-300/month, which usually includes a web site, mail service, and anonymous ftp service. Most of them provide pretty terrible service. 
Good luck. If you're interested in this sort of thing, the definitive book is "DNS and BIND," which is published by O'Reilly and Associates. It's pretty well written and covers everything you could ever want to know about how DNS works and how to configure name service on Unix machines (and NT machines running the NT port of BIND).
Posted by Andrew McCrea (Member # 674) on 12-30-2000, 08:47 PM:
So, How do TLD service providers get the domains... If they can get them, how do we get them... There must be some way we can get one by the way they're getting one!Andrew McCrea
I'm Cute!
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 12-30-2000, 09:35 PM:
I've been thinking about the domain name thing lately. There's been a proliferation of "dot-net" and "dot-org" that really should be "dot-com". Peeves me off!If those people who "keep" the internet were smart, they'd change what the "dot-XYZ"s mean and add a few more.
Let's say you're a TV station... Your address should be your call letters and "dot-TV" (eg: "WXYZ.TV") Make one for radio stations as well. There could be a "dot-mag" for magazines and such. What I *REALLY* want is a "dot-prv" suffix that could be for us "normal" people. Essentially, it would be something like "randystankey.prv" (Somehow we have to figure out how to account for all the people with duplicate names like "John Smith".
Where this is all going is to help people figure out who the hell they are dealing with when they go to a site. Is this "guy" trying to sell you something legitimate? or is he selling subscriptions to his porno-sight?
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-31-2000, 10:17 AM:
The people who run the current TLDs got the rights to do so for historical reasons, as they were all created before the commercialization of the Internet (circa 1994/1995).
I sort of agree with Randy that TLDs for specific purposes are a good thing (though .tv is really supposed to belong to the Republic of Tuvalu, regardless of what the marketing propaganda says). Adding random new TLDs without specific requirements for who may register names in them, though, was a really bad move on the part of ICANN. Why have both .biz and .com? People will just register the same name in both TLDs, just as they do now with .com and .net (which are supposed to serve different purposes). My reason for being against .musuem is that museums (musea?) currently fit nicely into .org, which is not overcrowded.
There was a suggestion at one point to have .nom, for personal use, but I forget why that didn't work out.
The dumbest new TLD proposal that anyone took seriously was .web, which, thankfully, didn't pass muster to the ICANN bureaucrats. Tying a TLD to a specific technology would have been a terrible mistake. Just imagine if someone had come up with .gopher or .archie or something similiarly inane five years ago...
Posted by Paul Cunningham (Member # 501) on 01-01-2001, 06:35 AM:
Randy,I am not 100% certain but I think some new domain endings (whatever they are called) are soon to be released. One of these will be dot name ie PaulCunningham.name
Paul
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 01-01-2001, 09:10 AM:
When are they going to release "dot-FreakyPorno" and "dot-YouWillGetSpamIfYouGoToThis Website"? 