Comment on ICANN proposes creating .INTERNAL domain
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 4 months ago.local is recommended for use with mDNS/Zeroconf
Comment on ICANN proposes creating .INTERNAL domain
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 4 months ago.local is recommended for use with mDNS/Zeroconf
Robert7301201@slrpnk.net 4 months ago
Yes, you’re right, RFC 6762 proposes reserving .local for mDNS. I was not aware of this until you brought it up, hence the dangers of using using TLDs not specifically designated for internal use.
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 4 months ago
I had actually used .local for years until I caved and bought kingthrillgore.name and used it both for my web sigh and my local domains. For most people, this is an unnecessary cost. We should really approve adding .lan and .locahost to ICANN as reserved domains as well.
Robert7301201@slrpnk.net 4 months ago
.localhost is already reserved for the loopback, per RFC 2606, but I agree with you in general. A small network shouldn’t have to have a $10-15/year fee to be compliant if they don’t want to use a domain outside their network.
As other posters have mentioned, .lan .home .corp and such are so widely used that ICANN can’t even sell them without causing a technical nightmare.
conorab@lemmy.conorab.com 4 months ago
People who do not wish to buy a GTLD can use home.arpa as it is already reserved. If you are at the point of setting up your own DNS but cannot afford $15 a year AND cannot use home.arpa I’d be questioning purchasing decisions. Hell, you can always use sub-domains in home.arpa if you need multiple unique namespaces in a single private network.
Basically, if you’re a business in a developed country or maybe developing country, you can afford the domain and would probably spend more money on IT hours working around using non-GTLDs than $15 a year.