Hacker News Reader

Comment by rikkus | Hacker News Reader

I was already slightly concerned about using getting a .cc domain for my email address, due to it being a 'lesser' TLD and thinking this sort of thing might happen. Are there ways to mitigate this risk in general, or is it something we generally have to accept if we're not choosing .com domains?

View on HN

I've had a .CC domain for the last 6 years or so. Got it originally for starting a computer consultancy (hence going with .CC instead of traditional .COM). I folded the operation but kept the domain and have been using email based on that domain as my personal email for all these years without disruption. (A caveat though: email is based on Google Apps for your domain not sure if that matters.) I went with it because there was a decent-enough (meh) name behind it (eNom). If the backers of the domain had been some unknown organization I'll be honest, not so sure i would have used it. I can't provide fool-proof ways to mitigate issues, but for what its worth, I've had luck with .CC all these years.

The good of domains like .CC: * Your desired domain name likely to be more available than .COM/.NET/.ORG. * If a tech-centric business, your clients might think of you as edgy and non-conventional. * Some domains like .CC have one less character to type - ok, so its a small benefit. ;-)

The bad of domains like .CC: * Many non-tech folks still think there are only 3 or 4 TLDs in the world...so you have to specificy something like: "It's .CC not .COM"...and they usually respond with "Huh??" Its funny, in all the years I've had my domain, the only reason I've not received email is because of folks mis-typing ".COM" instaed of .CC. * Filling out forms on websites whose devs mistakenly assume - since your address does not end in .COM/.NET/.ORG - that it must be an "invalid email address". Though this occurs very, very rarely now-adays.

I'd say that depends heavily on what TLD you are talking about. I find IIS[1] (the foundation that runs .se) freaking awesome, but I guess .se wouldn't make much sense if you're not Swedish.

[1] https://www.iis.se/english/about-se/

I think (but don't hold me to it), that country-ran (eg, .co.uk, .us) or major TLDs are safe (eg, .net, org)

I don't understand what you mean by "country-ran." .us and .uk are ccTLDs, meaning they were created and recognized 2-3 decades ago by ICANN based on ISO country and Territory codes. ccTLSs are among the oldest continually operating TLDs. In fact, .io is a ccTLD.

But that doesn't make them "run by a country". .us is not run by the US government. It is run by Neustar. There is not something that says Neustar won't have poorly available/slow name servers, beyond that same statement that the .io people said.

I was under the impression that ccTLDs are administered/ran by the country they belong to (eg, I thought .us was administered by the US government). It sounds like I'm wrong though, my bad.

Countries have the oversight, but they usually contract out its administration to some company.

Well, happens with .se. in the past http://securityandthe.net/2009/10/13/se-domains-offline/ and other tlds as well.

.com would also be a very safe bet.

Whatever domain you choose, you're reliant on the root servers for that particular TLD. All you can do is look at who runs it and see how competent you think they are (well, I guess you could try to negotiate an SLA in your contract with them)? Just as with e.g. national telecom operators, or national postal services, there are nations (large or small) that have highly competent, reliable TLD administrators, and there are nations that have unreliable ones.

The DNS for .cc is run by Verisign, who also run DNS for .com and .net. I wouldn't worry about .cc when it comes to namserver reliability.

i can just see the option to avoid TLDs which "belong" to companies acting in volatile markets... which may be indeed of concern with all those fancy new generic TLDs.

i would welcome better proposals, too.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com