The .TEL Discussion Thread

[brendan52190]

Hi

For this, let's assume that .tel will not be a total flop.

What type of keywords will be most valuable for this extension? Will it be geographical keywords, like newyork.tel, losangeles.tel, etc, or what else?

 

[hullswingerscom]

if theres no search functionality it will be poor deal

 

[Kate]

if theres no search functionality it will be poor deal

Exactly...

If your contact details fit within one page it's no big deal really.
But if you want to build directories a search function is definitely a must.

 

[virtualhunter]

Hello guyz and girlz! :P
I will like to know what do I need to change so that mydomain.tel do not appear in my browser as: "http://s0.webproxy.nic.tel/lookup/mydomain.tel" but: mydomain.tel instead. (My .tel domain was registered with DomainMonster.com) Thanks.

 

[plaggypig]

you do realize this article you've referenced is against new TLD's in general.... im sorry to inform you, but this would include .TEL

Really, that's how you read it? The whole point of the article was to argue against the creation of .mobi.

 

[MicroGuy]

Now is the webproxy.nic temporary or not? if not you can claim your money back or do something to get the correct url for yourdomain.tel displaying in browser.

We all need more infos on this, maybe justin or hosting providers can answer. If it's webproxy.nic for life than what telnic advertise is false.

My question would be why would Telnic (.org????) even use this as a temporary solution? It seems like it would be better to wait until the domains actually resolved before using some strange redirect configuration.

Again, this is why it's better to have control over your own domain instead of being forced into a registrar hosting solution. IMO.

 

[ginggang]

you do realize this article you've referenced is against new TLD's in general.... im sorry to inform you, but this would include .TEL

I agree .TBL uses the .mobi and .xxx as they were up for discussion back in 2004. He mentions any TLD in the text.

The original plan for the use of .mobi which he objected to did not and has not come to pass. It did appear on WAP networks as the "Walled Garden" syndrome which the phone operators instigated. His fear was you would have two seperate internets.

Technology and the use of the internet has moved on so I'm sure how many of his arguments are still valid or strenghthend/weakened

 

[hasseily]

OK Read this carefully:
There is a big problem with hosting services actually and don't know how they will fix that:
actually all your .tel are displaying link like: http://s1.webproxy.nic.tel/lookup/www.yourdomain.tel

That's because for the web, cookies are at the second level and logging the user for all of .tel automatically (the Telfriends privacy) requires a common second-level domain. That's why we redirect to nic.tel. One more reason why the web is much less interesting than direct DNS access.
Clearly you guys are not happy about this state of affairs. We hear you. So we're NOT going to auto-login the user (when he's got the cookie) to display private info, we're going to require him to actually click on a link "see private data" or something like that which will behave just like now, and this way we can keep the original url as-is. We're working on planning and implementing this change.

That is why iphone don't display the mobile version but desktop version but when you go to http://largeco.tel Telnic dot tel example, you'll see the correct url (not webproxy...) so it display the mobile version on your iphone and desktop version on your PC. Also for SEO it's perfect. Also subdomains are recognized: http://locations.largeco.tel/

The reason why largeco.tel and henri.tel behave differently is that largeco was a very old demo domain without any of the new privacy features, and doesn't run on the production systems. Also largeco.tel was behaving differently with mobile phones, not caring if a phone had a full browser or not.
So as I said above, the plan of attack is:
- change the behavior so there's no auto-display of private info if the user has already saved his login via a cookie, and therefore public data will display on the original domain.tel url.
- change the sensitivity to mobile phones, and make every mobile (including iphone, bberry, winmobile, and more importantly S60) hit the super-light mobile text-only version.

H

PS: None of the above matters when using native apps hitting the DNS directly.

 

[plaggypig]

Technology and the use of the internet has moved on so I'm sure how many of his arguments are still valid or strenghthend/weakened

They're all still valid in principle, but the saving grace is that .mobi is barely used, and so hasn't led to any of these problems. It really worries me that ICANN approved it in the first place though.

There are arguments against creating any new TLDs, but they are quite different from the arguments against .mobi specifically.

Don't wish to second guess TBL, but in the case of .tel somebody like him might argue for FOAF or other semantic web formats to handle contact information (I don't think it would be a valid argument against .tel).. I wish we could have those kinds of discussions around here :blink:

 

[aliencafe]

Just wanted to say thanks for the Update Henri. Looks like Pills.tel is up and running and all the issues discussed here are being addressed as we speak.

Regards-

 

[FreakySteve]

Re: TBL article

Part of TBL's point in the article had to do with new TLDs, especially .mobi, taking away from the universal access to information aspect of the web.

Dot-tel doesn't take away from that access, it contributes further to universally compatible communications by freeing you from the restrictions of web browsing.

Walled gardens, proprietary communities and other closed systems are far more hindering to the progress of communications than any of the "restrictions" or "problems" people claim on dot-tel. Dot-tel is the first TLD to think of the web as an equal communications element to all others (e.g. phone, e-mail, VoIP, IM, etc.).

The Internet offers a lot more than web pages.

 

[mjnels]

Really, that's how you read it? The whole point of the article was to argue against the creation of .mobi.

yes but read the entire article... it is also against .XXX

it is completely against anymore new TLD's... you cant just reference one thing in an article that you think supports your point while ignoring the parts that dont.

Part of TBL's point in the article had to do with new TLDs, especially .mobi, taking away from the universal access to information aspect of the web.

Dot-tel doesn't take away from that access, it contributes further to universally compatible communications by freeing you from the restrictions of web browsing.

Walled gardens, proprietary communities and other closed systems are far more hindering to the progress of communications than any of the "restrictions" or "problems" people claim on dot-tel. Dot-tel is the first TLD to think of the web as an equal communications element to all others (e.g. phone, e-mail, VoIP, IM, etc.).

The Internet offers a lot more than web pages.

i think i've just entered the twillight zone.

by definition, .TEL is way more of a "walled garden" than .MOBI

i do not mean this as an insult, but think about what you are saying... you are drinking a bit too much of the kool-aid.

 

[ginggang]

They're all still valid in principle, but the saving grace is that .mobi is barely used, and so hasn't led to any of these problems.

The vision TBL had as not come to be , not down to .mobi splitting the net but more that the .mobi evolved from the original purpose it was to serve


"The .mobi domain is described as being for the use of a community. To quote the proposal, the target community for the .mobi TLD is:

Individual and business consumers of mobile devices,services and applications
Mobile content and service providers
Mobile operators
Mobile device manufacturers and vendors
IT technology and software vendors who serve the mobile community
This is in fact a mixture of reasons. It sounds as though there is a use for ".mobi" when the provider of a service intends it to be for the benefit of mobile users. There appears to be a desire to limit the use of ".mobi" to companies -- perhaps those in the group."

The way I read that he was seeing a walled garden, a seperate network.

Dot-tel is the first TLD to think of the web as an equal communications element to all others (e.g. phone, e-mail, VoIP, IM, etc.).

The Internet offers a lot more than web pages.

You've just described .mobi :imho: :hehe:

I think there is mileage in .tel but from a developer perspective very limited. I can't see how I would use it as a user. I would be interested to hear real world applications of the domain. How would I use it ?

 

[Ms Domainer]

*

My plan is to integrate .tel with .com, not .mobi (Has.tel and Has-tel.com). In the near future, I think internet mobile phones will have the capability to automatically convert web sites into mobile-compliant formats. And later on, that won't even be necessary as small devices become more powerful (my tiny Lenovo has a 120 gig hard drive, with a 1 gig RAM, which seems to be enough for today's needs).

For now, my "search" function will be a click to a .com directory and/or Telnic's directory page. I do agree that a search button on the card would be a good enhancement and would not overtax the DNS. I'm getting the sense that Henri is listening to our concerns and considering them.

I suspect that there are already mobile-compliant platforms for .com (and other TLDs, not just .mobi).

Keep in mind that early adopters almost always inherit the glitches and the headaches--part of the price of being first.



*

 

[Jeff]

I think we're going to soon need ... a #1 Namepros highly brandable .TEL Forum™, IMHO. :gl: :talk:

-Jeff

 

[ginggang]

*



For now, my "search" function will be a click to a .com directory and/or Telnic's directory page. I do agree that a search button on the card would be a good enhancement and would not overtax the DNS. I'm getting the sense that Henri is listening to our concerns and considering them.



*

A conventional .com website linked to a .tel site in essence ? So to get to the .tel listing I would go through a convential search engine to find the .tel entry I would be looking for ?

I think we're going to soon need ... a #1 Namepros highly brandable .TEL Forum™, IMHO. :gl: :talk:

-Jeff

I think it would be a good thing. Like .mobi this is a very narrowly defined tld which a lot of people have faith in. As long as it does not replace the .mobi forum :hehe:

 

[Jeff]

I think it would be a good thing. Like .mobi this is a very narrowly defined tld which a lot of people have faith in. As long as it does not replace the .mobi forum :hehe:

Although the highly brandable .TEL essentially makes the very narrow "dot Mobey" extension obsolete (of course, it's always been unnecessary!) - particularly from it being a short, easily memorable, and branding persepctive ... I, too, think we should leave that (".MOBI) forum open for their small niche, and vanity discussions IMHO. :D

-Jeff

 

[Ms Domainer]

A conventional .com website linked to a .tel site in essence ? So to get to the .tel listing I would go through a convential search engine to find the .tel entry I would be looking for ?

*

From .tel to a mobile-compliant search engine, like Telnic directory pages.

I do agree that a direct search button at the top of the card to the telnic directory would be best.

Right now, I'm more interested in how search engines will rank .tel. Will my high-ranking one-word generic keywords rank high?

I suspect that they will because the search engines will know that .tel is not meant to host webistes but to store contact information--thus a different search algorithm for .tel.

Of course, I don't know this for sure--just a guess.

*

 

[Steven]

I don't understand.

What's with .tel directly connecting to DNS and such talk?

Aren't all active websites using DNS?

To put it simply, active .tel website is a website.

*

Right now, I'm more interested in how search engines will rank .tel. Will my high-ranking one-word generic keywords rank high?

I suspect that they will because the search engines will know that .tel is not meant to host webistes but to store contact information--thus a different search algorithm for .tel.

Of course, I don't know this for sure--just a guess.

*

1) like http://s1.webproxy.nic.tel/lookup/www.yourdomain.tel if they continue to redirect

2) contact information website is still a website...
just a static one

 

[Ms Domainer]

*

Apparently, Telnic is working on the proxy issue.

Tel is different in that information goes directly on the DNS server. Other TLD sites go through another layer via an IP address--.tels do not have an IP address.

*

I don't understand.

What's with .tel directly connecting to DNS and such talk?

Aren't all active websites using DNS?

To put it simply, active .tel website is a website.



1) like http://s1.webproxy.nic.tel/lookup/www.yourdomain.tel if they continue to redirect

2) contact information website is still a website...
just a static one

 

[Steven]

*

Apparently, Telnic is working on the proxy issue.

Tel is different in that information goes directly on the DNS server. Other TLD sites go through another layer via an IP address--.tels do not have an IP address.

*

There is IP address

VIP.tel = 195.253.3.235

It wouldn't make any sense if it didn't.