|
| ▲ | edent 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The boring answer is that infrastructure costs money. You either use taxes from everyone to pay for it or you take money from the people using the thing. |
|
| ▲ | r_lee 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| it's like Wikipedia begging for money saying they don't have enough |
| |
|
| ▲ | doublerabbit 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Because they can; it's a racket. Like paid SSL certificates, all of it is corporate greed. One solution is running your own DNS servers. This way you can list your own TLD's. However good luck in convincing others to change their DNS. |
| |
| ▲ | wizzwizz4 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Obligatory shout-out to OpenNIC: https://servers.opennic.org/ | | |
| ▲ | culi 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I never heard of OpenNIC before! Cool project. I wonder how complicated would it be for a layperson like me to have my website work on OpenNIC and regular DNS at the same time | | |
| ▲ | doublerabbit 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Not sure it's possible because dotCom is owned by verisign and designated to the internet root servers. Your ISP, ISP Peering DNS, and any other DNS service would override any of your DNS zones. It does make me wonder if I hosted my own root servers for a new dotCom tld would I get chased down by the internet police? | | |
| ▲ | inigyou an hour ago | parent [-] | | No, there's no internet police who would stop you from doing that. However you had better point your .com to Verisign's .com or so many things won't work when connected to your DNS server. Also you will never get IANA to recognise you as the new authority for .com which means people will need to go out of their way to use your root zone instead of the de-facto-standard one published by IANA. It's a bit like signing your website certificate with your own root certificate. The protocol itself is agnostic to who issues the root certificates, but good luck convincing distros to install yours by default, so your website will only be accessible by people who go far out of their way to install it. It's a shame, because ICANN being under US jurisdiction is effectively an attack against the DNS. | | |
| ▲ | culi an hour ago | parent [-] | | > It's a shame, because ICANN being under US jurisdiction is effectively an attack against the DNS. Agreed. At least in 2016 we got the US to give up its veto power to the PTI which has global oversight. Still ofc the ICANN is just another company based in Los Angeles and falls under California and US legal jurisdiction. I would much prefer control be transferred to the UN ITU |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | inigyou an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I tried to join OpenNIC once but, like many such small informal organisations, the ingroup dynamics are quite toxic. |
|
|
