1 character .COM's/.NETs -- value?

[devolution]

Anyone have experience with selling 1-character .com & .net IDNs?

I have quite a few - some typeable on foreign keyboards, other just some fancy nice-looking symbols... (Like ͂http://www.͂.com) - yep it does work! Lol..

Any values/prices would be nice...

 

[DNWizardX9]

$0 who would type it? It doesn't exist in any language.

 

[WhoNet]

I've sold some 1-character .com & .net IDNs before. & I do believe that some of the very popular symbol (such as: ©, ®, €...) domains is valueable

 

[jacksonm]

I've sold some 1-character .com & .net IDNs before. & I do believe that some of the very popular symbol (such as: ©, ®, €...) domains is valueable

Wrong, no value - these are being discontinued very soon.


http://www.verisign.com/static/page_042503.html


.

 

[WhoNet]

Wrong, no value - these are being discontinued very soon.


http://www.verisign.com/static/page_042503.html


.

Thanks for the info.

I'm not sure if it's mean that VeriSign will not allow the NEW REGISTRATION of symbol/dingbat IDNs or not?

I'll try to make some renewal of my symbol IDNs, and see...

Thanks for the info.

I'm not sure if it's mean that VeriSign will not allow the NEW REGISTRATION of symbol/dingbat IDNs or not?

I'll try to make some renewal of my symbol IDNs, and see...

I've success to renewal one of my symbol IDN (xn--nzg.com) on Name.com -
so, I think that it is safe for the "registed symbol IDNs" if you keep on renewal them :]

 

[jacksonm]

I've success to renewal one of my symbol IDN (xn--nzg.com) on Name.com -
so, I think that it is safe for the "registed symbol IDNs" if you keep on renewal them :]

Safe for now...

Also, what about if you try to transfer them to another registrar?

.

 

[WhoNet]

Safe for now...

Also, what about if you try to transfer them to another registrar?

.

I've make some transfer during the pass few months and all no problem!



I think that VeriSign will get much bigger trouble if they "terminate" the "registed" symbol/dingbat IDNs -

 

[lipps]

What they are showing is that new registrations will not be allowed.
IDN.IDN is working to update support for how dns handles special characters.
Disallowing these types of registration will help to reduce the workload of the servers. IDN future registration and use is going to increase the workload of the servers greatly around the world once fully inplace.
I have not see documentation yet showing if current registrations will be grandfathered in. Even if they are I do not know if the scripts that handle the characters are going to be kept active. I suspect that they will not.
I do know that they are working to support a few other languages in the near future. These languages are not standard and seen mostly in some of the older publications of the world.

 

[jacksonm]

IDN.IDN is working to update support for how dns handles special characters.

Wrong. DNS servers are not going to handle non-ascii characters. IDN extensions will be entered into the root DNS servers like this example:

.xn--0zwm56d (IDN enabled applications will translate them to UNICODE)

Disallowing these types of registration will help to reduce the workload of the servers.

Wrong. The effects of a few thousand missing domains from the daily DNS queries is similar to the effects of a few thousand missing grains of sand from a beach.

IDN future registration and use is going to increase the workload of the servers greatly around the world once fully inplace.

I seriously doubt it. The only thing that is going to increase the workload on DNS servers is more internet users. If IDN extensions didn't exist, they'd be visiting ASCII extensions at the same rate. The ones who are currently visiting ASCII domains aren't going to start visiting twice as many domains per day just because there are IDN extensions - a person only has so much time in a day to surf. What will happen is that certain groups of people will simply start visiting IDN domains instead of ASCII domains, more and more over time.

You may see some older people who have never used the net before get on when IDN.IDN becomes available, but I doubt that this number will be huge.

.

 

[lipps]

Really dont want to go into lessons on root server allocation and dns structure on the web but one has to remember that the dns server is not responsible for the handling of packets streams that pass through a network just tells them where to go.

By nature there are only allowed 13 root dns servers in our current dns structure. It is only through anycasting that allows for addition of new root servers. (ie servers that can share the same address to provide redundancy) As of 2007 I think there were only a total of 130 total root servers in existance. Known as A - (I dont remember what leters they are on now).
Root dns servers by default should not have to handle but a minimum of data exchange if the subordinate dns servers in the web update as they should.

Problem is as traffic increases on the web, more unknown quaries make it past the closest dns server to the root server. This is due to malformed data, unknown or incorrect data input, increased server replication, and denial of service attacks, to state only a few.

As this traffic increases it is only probable that more data will reach the root servers. You also have to take into consideration that a root server has to have a script installed to "translate" the character into its punycode. This requires processer usage decreasing the overall performance of the server itself.

Look at Poland. Currently only 30 to 40% +/- of the population is using the internet on a reguar basis. There are hundreds of reasons why. These usage stats are going to rise. If and when the idn "mainframe" is in place you should expect the usage by "native language" input to cause an exponential increase to an already increasing traffic load relative to the base rate of growth.

Poland by itself does not present a large challange but Take into consideration the 4 billion Chinese people that are going to be increasing usage and you can see why it is possible that data exchange at the dns root server level is going to increase with the release of billions of new idn domain names over the years.

Now looking at the disallowing of certain domain characters you have to look at their potential for use. Granted a few characters by themselves are nothing but try this
Say we want to keep @.com. No big deal by itself but then someone wants to reg [email protected] then [email protected] then [email protected] and eventually someone says there is a huge market for 12 letter @ domains because all of the other domains are taken. (LLLL.com) The number of disallowed domains is huge.
254 place holders for a name server, all with a combination of @. Now add the ! then the ^ then the & then whatever and you can see the number of domains that will be disallowed is huge. Granted disallowing the characters may be more for cosmetics and to reducephishing than to reduce traffic, but he action itself is going to decrease the potential for domain registrations.

We have to stop thinking like English speaking natives. The majority of people in the world do not speak English and do not want to be forced to learn the language, no more than many English speaking people want to take the time to learn Chinese.

The internet is still in its infancy. Ask someone from the 70's when the internet was nothing more than a big old Sperry Remmington running a couple of discussion boards with a dial up connection. There is a long way to go. Traffic is going to increase. Population increases, Businesses go online every day. It just a matter of fact. You may not see and increase in ASCII people going to idns but you are going to see native speakers increase traffic to idn domains.

As always jmho

 

[jacksonm]

The number of available combinations of unregistered ascii domains in dot com is also huge (and new extensions coming all the time, 64 chars long max). Symbols, dingbats, etc have absolutely zero effect on DNS server load. New domains will continue to be registered at roughly the same rate, dingbats allowed or not. The absence of dingbat domains is inconsequential.

Providing IDN extensions in the root is not going to cause a sudden and massive upsurge in DNS server load, nor will it cause a sudden and massive upsurge in new internet users. It will simply give people a choice as to which domains they prefer - and 98% of people will click anything in the first 3 SERPS. An IDN domain does, I believe, trigger a strong subconscious propensity to click - but that means they aren't clicking the other domain.

If ICANN were worried about the number of registered domain names affecting root server capacity, they wouldn't keep rolling out extension after extension. The internet uptake in certain countries like Russia, China, and Turkey will grow significantly over the coming years, due to connectivity becoming available and computers becoming affordable, but this can be handled. ISPs can intercept DNS queries to the root and handle them locally - this is an extremely simple issue. This already, unfortunately, happens in Finland due to the EU mandated child-porn filters (they have a two-phase system: transparent proxy and DNS query interception/replacement).

15 minutes of study on theory of something is just that. It also needs to have years of experience and practical understanding applied to it, or it's just as useless as any other theory standing by itself. But you're off to a good start as a researcher!

.

 

[lipps]

http://www.icann.org/topics/dns-stability-draft-paper-06feb08.pdf

Here is the latest draft on what is being done by Icann at this time. Feel free to submit comments on the possible implications. Any input I am sure is greatly appreciated.

As for me I remain steadfast on the principles of DNS security and the de- exploitation of the inherent vulnerabilities that exist in the current schema.

One just has to remember the dos attacks of 2002 or 2004 or even 2007 to und3rstand what a sudden surge of data directed toward a root server can do.
I still do not believe that there is enough redundancy in the network at this time to allow for the mass influx of all of the new gcctlds and file extension domains along with the increase in traffic. (Its my opinion deal with it)

ICANN suggest themselves that this may be an issue but only goes into an operational level. They are basing their data on the testing of only 2 servers in a beta protocol environment on stable tested servers. They are putting their faith in anycasting (which has it limitations and issues as well as set up).

The true test is going to come with the full implementation of all the new (tld) across the world. I don't think anyone really knows at this time what the total effects are going to be.

It has been too often that an admin or an organization has prepped for an event without sound data and just theory to back it up leading to multiple problems.

No one likes the speed with which idn.idn is taking but in reality it is probably very necessary.

Then again what do I know. I gave up my network engineering cert paths in 2003 after 10 years to pursue medicine.

Going back to the thread topic. Some of those single character domains aren't worth regging. I have many from some time ago. They get no traffic except for the occasional bot. If things go as they say they are I would let them drop.