“I’ve begun to see Web sites with some unusual domain name extensions.  Why were these names introduced, and who, if anyone, regulates their use?"

Since the Internet’s Domain Name System (DNS) was created in the mid 1980s, it has provided a framework for naming host domains (i.e., Web sites) as well as for managing the huge databases, or “registries,” used to locate particular hosts.  At its highest level, the universe of Internet hosts, of which there are now over 25 million, has been organized into several Top-level Domains (TLDs).  These include three generic TLDs, .com, .org, and .net, and a handful of restricted TLDs, including .edu (limited to educational institutions), and .gov, limited to U.S. government agencies.  The original generic TLDs (.com, .org, .edu, .mil, .gov, plus country domains matching the two-letter ISO standard country codes, e.g., .uk, .au) were established in 1984, as part of the original design process for the DNS.  There are now more than 240 country-specific TLDs that are regulated at the national level. The use of TLDs as host name extensions was intended to help users navigate the Internet, by classifying hosts according to the type of institution they represent.  At the same time, organizing the Internet by TLD has enabled decentralization of the database registries, a necessary arrangement given the fact that the Internet now logs more than 12 billion DNS lookups every day.  The table below indicates the dramatic growth in the number of Internet hosts in recent years:

Internet Domain Names

Since the late 1990s, the Web’s exponential growth has made it clear that more generic TLDs will be needed to help users find information and to maintain the stability of the DNS itself. The .com domain, in particular, has become so popular that it now accounts for roughly 80 percent of all domain names. The ubiquity of .com names has raised two specific problems; first, .com has come to be used by a wide range of organizations and not just businesses, as was originally intended.  Second, as the number of registered hosts has grown, organizations have found it harder and harder to devise meaningful hostnames for their sites, especially since it has became a common practice for individuals and organizations to register multiple hostnames, often in the hope of selling the rights to others, a practice known as “cybersquatting.”

In spite of the consensus that new TLDs are needed, the expansion process has been neither straightforward nor without controversy. At present, the DNS is primarily governed by ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, a private non-profit organization formed in 1998, and funded in large part by the U.S. government.  After ICANN announced its intention to expand the DNS, it received applications from 44 different organizations hoping to win contracts to operate the registry database for each new TLD.  Over a hundred new TLDs were proposed.

From ICANN’s perspective, the choice of new TLDs depended to a large extent on the business plans and technical expertise of the prospective registry operators.  The selection process was contentious, however.  Some prospective registry operators have charged ICANN with undue secrecy and with setting arbitrary criteria for the choice of new domains.  Many expressed puzzlement why some names were chosen over others.  The name .web, for instance, was rejected, in spite of its obvious appeal as a generic TLD.  Recently, ICANN has been the subject of calls for reform within the technology community and by members of the U.S. Congress.

Still, in November 2000, ICANN formally approved seven new TLDs, with more expected to follow.  The new TLDs approved thus far are:  .biz, .info, .name, .pro, .aero, .coop, and .museum.  All are now operational except .pro, for which negotiations are still underway. For information on the current status of the new TLDs, see http://www.internic.net/faqs/new-tlds.html.

The seven new TLDs fall into two basic categories:  “unsponsored” and “sponsored.”  The unsponsored domains, .biz, .name, .info, and .pro, are intended for broad use and are managed according to global policies, set by ICANN, in much the same way as the older TLDs.  However, unlike the old TLDs, ICANN has decided to place some limits on the use of the new TLDs, to ensure that .biz, for instance, is used only by private businesses.  Likewise, the .pro domain will require proof of professional credentials before a host name can be registered.  (A debate has been underway as to which groups should be entitled to call themselves “professionals.”  Doctors, lawyers, and accountants are likely to be accepted, but how about plumbers, musicians, and horse trainers?)

The .pro and .name domains represent a further departure from current practice, insofar as hosts will only be able to register third-level domain names instead of second-level names, as is the case with existing TLDs.  For example, if I decided to name my Web site “jmw.turner.name,” I can only register “jmw” as the unique portion of my hostname.  This policy was adopted to discourage cybersquatting, in which, in this case, someone might register turner.name and thereby prevent everyone else with this last name from using these characters in their hostname.  ICANN has also sought to combat cybersquatting in the new TLDs by calling for procedures whereby trademark holders can register their own trademarks as domain names, before the new domains are opened to the general public.

As for the “sponsored” TLDs, .museum, .coop, and .aero, it was intended from the start to restrict these domains to relatively small numbers of institutions, representing particular communities (museums, non-profit cooperatives, and the aviation industry, in these cases).  For each of these domains, ICANN has designated an official Sponsor organization (see http://www.internic.net/faqs/new-tlds.html) that has been empowered to set policies governing who can register hostnames.

In general, the introduction of new Top-level Domains has been part of an ongoing effort to better regulate the Internet as well as to expand and improve its infrastructure.  Nonetheless, it is possible that the Internet might continue to evolve in its historically decentralized and often chaotic manner, in spite of ICANN’s efforts to the contrary.  For example, in 2000, the .tv Corporation, a subsidiary of VeriSign, Inc., acquired the rights to the .tv domain from the Pacific island nation of Tuvalu.  Since ICANN’s authority does not extend to country-specific TLDs, the .tv Corporation thus has a TLD for which it can set its own policies.  In the coming years we can expect the Internet to remain a dynamic frontier, with new territories constantly opening up and new groups of settlers moving in to stake their claim.

-- pkb

Publishing Information

RLG DigiNews (ISSN 1093-5371) is a newsletter conceived by the members of the Research Libraries Group's PRESERV community. Funded in part by the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) 1998-2000, it is available internationally via the RLG PRESERV Web site. It will be published six times in 2002. Materials contained in RLG DigiNews are subject to copyright and other proprietary rights. Permission is hereby given for the material in RLG DigiNews to be used for research purposes or private study. RLG asks that you observe the following conditions: Please cite the individual author and RLG DigiNews (please cite URL of the article) when using the material; please contact Jennifer Hartzell, RLG Corporate Communications, when citing RLG DigiNews.

Any use other than for research or private study of these materials requires prior written authorization from RLG, Inc. and/or the author of the article.

RLG DigiNews is produced for the Research Libraries Group, Inc. (RLG) by the staff of the Department of Preservation and Conservation, Cornell University Library. Co-Editors, Anne R. Kenney and Nancy Y. McGovern; Production Editor, Barbara Berger Eden; Associate Editor, Robin Dale (RLG); Technical Researchers, Richard Entlich and Peter Botticelli; Technical Coordinator, Carla DeMello; Technical Assistant, Kimberly Gazzo.

All links in this issue were confirmed accurate as of August 13, 2002.

Please send your comments and questions to RLG-DigiNews Editorial Staff.