YHK - yet another hacker news clone

.name Grandfathered

667 points p4bl0 8 hours ago 155 comments

Previously: .name Termination - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49550772 - Sept 2026 (547 comments)

toomuchtodo 8 hours ago | parent

https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/consensus-policies/kane-t...

Success is possible. Well done to all.

derhuerst 7 hours ago | parent

previous discussion on the predecessor post, 69 days ago, 547 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49550772

dang 23 minutes ago | parent

Thanks! Macroexpanded:

.name Termination - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49550772 - Sept 2026 (547 comments)

Tepix 7 hours ago | parent

Vive la résistance!

Resistance is not futile.

cobbzilla 7 hours ago | parent

> to my lawyers Jan, Flip and Diégo who threw the book at ICANN

Resistance with a strong case and competent lawyers is not futile.

dataflow 7 hours ago | parent

And with a lot of money to burn.

doublepg23 7 hours ago | parent

I've had a .name for almost a decade now and was not aware of it's history.

Shame I didn't register on my lastname .name , I had thought it was a much newer gTLD.

dist-epoch 7 hours ago | parent

So, turns out Verisign is not the Devil incarnate?

cobbzilla 7 hours ago | parent

The Devil is no match for a sufficiently talented attorney

mh- 6 hours ago | parent

In 1997, this was explored in a documentary featuring Keanu Reeves.

brettermeier 6 hours ago | parent

Why do you think that???

a1o 7 hours ago | parent

How does one register a domain under .name ? I can’t find info through search because it discards the dot no matter what I try.

SahAssar 7 hours ago | parent

Available under standard registrars that offer many TLDs, like inwx.com: https://www.inwx.com/en/domain/check?domain=testtest123.name...

peesem 7 hours ago | parent

but which support the actual third-level domains? for example, my last name is already taken as a .name domain by verisign, what if i want my firstname.lastname.name domain?

mercurywells 7 hours ago | parent

You'd have to try to find the contact that owns lastname.name and work out a private deal - you won't get ICANN protections though.

xigoi 6 hours ago | parent

The third-level domains are still being discontinued, it’s just that people who already have one get to keep it.

zamadatix 6 hours ago | parent

One can't (officially) register such 3rd level domains anywhere anymore.

It's just a combination in the ambiguity of what "it discards the dot" should mean in GGP's message combined with the article already clarifying 3rd level domains are not available on .name anymore leading to a lot of confused comments.

scott00 4 hours ago | parent

Gandi and 007names are the only ones I'm aware of that support the third-level domains.

toast0 7 hours ago | parent

Same as any gTLD, pick your favorite registrar and they probably support it. Give your registrar money, they'll give the registry money and boom. (more or less)

When .name was new, you may have needed to contract with the registry directly, it was an early new gTLD and I don't remember if they started with the registry/registrar split or not.

Afaik, new registrants are not able to register a third level domain, but second level domains have been available for a long time.

lambda 7 hours ago | parent

Did you read the link?

"Although they will be closing new registrations for 3rd-level .name domains, all existing domains (including this website) and email redirects will remain indefinitely."

They were apparently planning on shutting down the whole TLD. They will be leaving it up for existing registrants, but not allowing new registrations.

ksala_ 7 hours ago | parent

No, they were not planning that. This is only about 3rd level domain as the paragraph you quoted says. Every other TLD don't sell those (afaik). Normally "someone.name" would be a domain, and they would own all the subdomains. .name allowed you to register "one.someone.name" and "two.someone.name" as completely separated domains with completely separated owners. I understand why they should grandfather in existing domains but this was just madness.

lambda 7 hours ago | parent

Ah, fair enough. I kind of thought that third level domain registration was the whole point of the .name TLD, so I was interpreting it as shutting it down.

So the weird part then comes in: are all second level domains that have third level registrations now reserved? Do they stop being reserved if the last third level registration expires without being renewed?

ksala_ 7 hours ago | parent

Good question. Yeah no idea - the email linked in OP says they're going to send a new proposal, I'm assuming it will cover how they're planning to handle it. And I guess that yes blocking second level domains that have a third level already registered is the pragmatic choice.

troyrollo 2 hours ago | parent

They are grandfathering existing third levels and existing email forwarding services. The new RSEPs will just discontinue offering the services as new services, with Verisign saying they will take responsibility for ensuring that there will always be at least one registrar who supports both.

duskwuff 6 hours ago | parent

> I kind of thought that third level domain registration was the whole point of the .name TLD

It was initially! But there was enough demand for second-level registrations that they opened that up too (and set the stage for this whole mess).

toast0 5 hours ago | parent

> So the weird part then comes in: are all second level domains that have third level registrations now reserved? Do they stop being reserved if the last third level registration expires without being renewed?

Yes, second level domains that overlap with a registered third level domain have never been available. Under the original proposal, once all the third level domains were dropped, the overlapping second level domains would have been available (first come, first served). I believe current practice is the second level domain becomes available if all of the third level domains expire. Registrants in other threads indicated that there's no process to have an orderly transition from being the only the registrant of a third level domain under a specific second level name to registering that second level domain ... you would have to let your current name expire and hope to catch the second level name.

giancarlostoro 7 hours ago | parent

> After a long and expensive battle, news just dropped that Verisign is retracting its plan to terminate 22,000 domain names and email redirects. Although they will be closing new registrations for 3rd-level .name domains, all existing domains (including this website) and email redirects will remain indefinitely.

This was what I figured SHOULD happen when they did this. Allow existing customers to keep renewing, but nobody new allowed, if a tld frees up over time, reclaim it completely and sell it off.

What they were proposing should really be illegal...

Spivak 6 hours ago | parent

For it to be illegal I think we would have to have much stronger digital ownership laws. I would certainly support them. But for now a domain you "own" is just an entry in someone else's ledger and control is only enforced by contract for big players willing to pay.

mzajc 6 hours ago | parent

These domains wouldn't be worth a penny if they came with a disclaimer that they can be deregistered or even taken over at any point. With a bit of luck, somebody could snatch popular last name domains and set up a catch-all mailserver.

schoen 6 hours ago | parent

They do have such a limitation, because of things like UDRP. It's just that there are maybe some forms of restriction on the processes by which domain names can be involuntarily transferred or seized. But it's a real possibility!

not2b 4 hours ago | parent

People persist in "buying" digital movies e-books, and games despite the fact that they can disappear at any point, without warning, because the seller's license expired or they just feel like discontinuing the service.

TheGoddessInari 1 hour ago | parent

License as a SERVICE ™

cannonpalms 47 minutes ago | parent

These things have no resale value. That's what the commenter means when he talks about value.

schoen 6 hours ago | parent

There is a Ninth Circuit decision that domain names are a form of property

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kremen_v._Cohen

but it's tricky because the domain name registries and registrars have a kind of thicket of contracts nowadays that subordinates registrants' property interests to other rules and considerations. So I don't think a court would think that a modern-day domain name registrant has property rights in a domain name that supersede all of those contractual terms.

Edit: my recollection is that Kremen v. Cohen interpreted the legal defaults that applied because Kremen registered the domain name in an era when Network Solutions didn't require registrants to agree to a contract that limited Network Solutions's liability and gave it various explicit rights and powers.

I'm not a huge ICANN expert, but I think ICANN broadly thinks the status quo is preferable to one in which registrants had stronger, less equivocal property interests in names.

otterley 5 hours ago | parent

The Wikipedia summary of the case suggests that the ruling was much more than it was. Courts tend to rule on narrow issues, as it did here.

The question before the Court was not whether a domain name is a form of property. Both parties agreed that a domain name is a form of property; that wasn't in dispute. The Court did affirm their shared position in black letter law, though.

Rather, the question before the Court was whether, as intangible property, a tort of conversion claim relating to the domain name could be made under California law. Previously, cases disagreed as to whether it could be recognized. The Court found that it could be.

trollbridge 2 hours ago | parent

Thanks. That was an excellent summary.

falcor84 5 hours ago | parent

Agreed, but I just wanted to say that essentially every single thing anyone owns is, and has been from the invention of tally marks on clay tablets, an entry in someone's ledger.

stevage 3 hours ago | parent

Of all the thousands of things I own, as far as I know, only my car and my house exist in anyone else's ledger as belonging to me. Am I missing something?

Calazon 3 hours ago | parent

The money in your bank account?

dexterdog 49 minutes ago | parent

Don't forget about the money in your wallet as well since you don't control the printer.

cowlevel 2 hours ago | parent

All of your property exists in a kind of implicit ledger that a court can reify when needed. If a court decides your bed isn't yours, then it isn't.

warkdarrior 46 minutes ago | parent

Your phone will show up as yours in some Google or Apple database.

Your credit/debit cards (really your credit card accounts) will show up as yours in some bank database.

Your laptop may show up as your in some Apple/Microsoft/Google account.

sokoloff 32 minutes ago | parent

Your 401K. Your brokerage account. Your bank accounts.

unreal37 7 minutes ago | parent

I would find that hard to believe. You have a bank account, surely. A life insurance policy? Airline points? An account with the government social security office for your pension? There are probably dozens (if not hundreds) of things of value (even if the value is near zero) that exist in someone else's ledger.

bookofjoe 2 hours ago | parent

Yes. Otherwise I'd be happy to give you a GREAT price on all the movies I've "bought" from Apple and Amazon as well as myriad Kindle Books.

echelon 6 hours ago | parent

Now a "{first}.{second}.name" will be really awesome to own.

This is essentially premium real estate now. For us nerds, anyway.

Great job Neil and gang!

Macha 5 hours ago | parent

Well anyone can buy a second.name if second isn't already registered, and then set up their own first. subdomain, so most visitors aren't going to know the difference in between grandfathered in first.second.name sites and people who just bought second level domains and created their own subdomain.

jareklupinski 5 hours ago | parent

if you're lucky, you can do something like first.sec.ond

works for many polish people who own ski resorts :)

jayknight 4 hours ago | parent

I remember when delicious.com was just del.icio.us. I miss that site.

hackboyfly 3 hours ago | parent

My dyslexia would go bonkers.

BHSPitMonkey 15 minutes ago | parent

The documentation site for WLED is https://kno.wled.ge which I've always found to be adorable

DANmode 5 hours ago | parent

> What they were proposing should really be illegal...

Where?

gsich 5 hours ago | parent

Everywhere.

DANmode 4 hours ago | parent

Super reasonable proposal.

colonwqbang 2 hours ago | parent

What a useless comment.

The Berne Convention on copyright is ratified by "182 out of 195 countries". If I were to recite The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy in public almost anywhere in the world, I can be sued for it.

Maybe we need a Reston Convention on the right not to have your domain arbitrarily seized and sold to someone else.

DANmode 2 hours ago | parent

I don’t even know where to start rebutting your comment.

You can be sued for downloading NES ROMs, too. Make a point?

PS The Copyright and IP thing is pretty unique, and is often held as an example of the US’ true power and influence to protect its corporate interests.

kwanbix 7 hours ago | parent

Why would they even want to close it? It is probably close to 0 cost tot hem. Or am I wrong?

clickety_clack 7 hours ago | parent

My thoughts also, but maybe they can make more from a few sites like baby.name than they can from personal domains.

lambda 7 hours ago | parent

It works differently than pretty much every other TLD, which means it's different code paths to support.

Many registrars don't support the unique 3rd level domain setup for .name, so it can be hard to find registrars that properly support it.

There's also an associate email redirect service, which is unique to .name and probably costs money to run and maintain.

It's probably easier to support, and more valuable to sell second level .name domains.

Pretty terrible that they were considering just dropping tens of thousands of customer registrations however.

seattle_spring 5 hours ago | parent

> It works differently than pretty much every other TLD, which means it's different code paths to support.

but I was told that AI has made code obsolete and free

charcircuit 4 hours ago | parent

How is it different than others like .co.jp or .ne.jp?

lambda 4 hours ago | parent

Those ones have a fixed list of second level domains.

.name was something where you could register a two part domain, picking both the third and second level, to represent your first and last name.

swiftcoder 6 hours ago | parent

It has weird interactions with some modern browser features. For example domain isolation doesn't apply between subdomains of the same TLD, so john.smith.name and drew.smith.name don't get isolation in naive implementations.

tylergetsay 6 hours ago | parent

wouldn't that be a problem with a lot of other domains? like locality domains

timeinput 6 hours ago | parent

It definitely is. <ingress>.k8s.<mydns>.com regularly confuses what password I want to use if I have different authentication per ingress. More commonly if I run something else at <name>.<mydns>.com firefox and chrome are both happy to offer up my password for <other service>.<mydns>.com.

Closed. Wont fix.

mixdup 5 hours ago | parent

yes, but other locality domains are fairly static and well-known

.co.uk wouldn't have the same problem because everyone knows that combo is a TLD in and of itself. with a seemingly infinite possible combinations of blah.name that could be a TLD itself, or, might just be a subdomain of .name, it gets really weird

toast0 3 hours ago | parent

> with a seemingly infinite possible combinations

Verisign claimed approximately 22,000 third level domains [1] in July 2026. I don't see an estimate of the number of shared second level domains, but it's finite. The current public suffix list includes 10414 names [2]; so at maximum, the list would approximately triple in size --- not ideal, but feasible.

Edit: another post [3] claims approximately 2000 second levels names with multiple registrations; that's only a 20% increase in size for the existing list, which is again a lot, but feasible. There's some more specific data in an issue for the suffix list [4], that shows there were nine second level domains with multiple registered names underneath them, one of which might all be the same registrant (domain.name)...

Nine would be totally doable, if the request came from Verisign...

[1] https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/consensus-policies/fessen...

[2] including some with wildcards, re: your other post

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50446780

[4] https://github.com/publicsuffix/list/issues/2306

mixdup 56 minutes ago | parent

22,000 now, but there was no limit and more importantly no rhyme or reason or other way to tell what was a third level registration and what was a subdomain on a normal second level registration

Verisign could have published a list of every third level registration, it wasn't an impossible problem to solve, but it is different than static regional TLDs like .co.uk or .<state>.us

OkayPhysicist 4 hours ago | parent

We solve that problem with the public suffix list. The problem is there's a lot of .name domains, each of which would need to be added to the list.

OkayPhysicist 4 hours ago | parent

The real problem is that we'd have to add a wildcard to the public suffix list. That's it.

The public suffix list is the big list of all the URL suffixes that should not imply shared ownership of all their subdomains. For example the line

com

says "XYZ.com" and "ABC.com" should not be assumed to be controlled by the same entity.

Problem is, all 1st level domains registered to the .name TLD should be added to the list, and that's a lot of domains. The correct answer, IMO, would be to add a wildcard

*.name

but that would involve updating all the code that relies on the public suffix list to support said wildcard.

toast0 3 hours ago | parent

*.name isn't a good solution either, because the vast majority of registrations are at the second level.

If you want to do it properly, you really do need to include all of the second level domains that have more than one third level registrant. And update that periodically as domains expire... there might be three registrants under .example.name today, but if they all (or all but one) stop paying, example.name is no longer a public suffix and it should be removed.

OkayPhysicist 3 hours ago | parent

Having "no cookies shared between subdomains" as a restriction on the entire TLD isn't completely beyond the pale. There are other TLDs that have restrictions, like HTTPS being required for .dev

toast0 2 hours ago | parent

Having it imposed on existing registrants after the fact really is beyond the pale, IMHO.

It'd be one thing if it was there since the beginning, like https for .dev, but it would probably break existing sites if you add it after the fact.

londons_explore 38 minutes ago | parent

With only 22000 registrants, the number of sites broken might be just a handful.

thbb123 25 minutes ago | parent

How can they enforce that? If my DNS config points www.mydomain.dev to my vps, what can prevent me from answering on port 80?

somat 28 minutes ago | parent

The "real" problem is the public suffix list. All domains should be considered public, that is, a sub domain gains no trust from it's parent domain.

There is a good argument that the public suffix list should be distributed via dns, and it is easy to propose a scheme for it. Two I know of are. A specific public suffix record marking a domain public or private. The presence of a soa record which already transfers the authority of a domain, should be used to determine if that sub domain is public or private.

But private unless in some third party list is the worst way to handle it.

troyrollo 3 hours ago | parent

The public suffix list is a stupid hack that should be replaced by formal protocols allowing boundaries to be defined by either DNS entries, or a file on the web server.

JoshTriplett 1 hour ago | parent

I personally think the public suffix list should be replaced by zero sharing even amongst subdomains, and if you want to talk between x.y.example.org and example.org you can use CORS just like any other cross-domain request.

londons_explore 52 minutes ago | parent

I think the real challenge is the millions of sites which rely on the existing behaviour.

JoshTriplett 39 minutes ago | parent

Do it for every new TLD. Do it for every new domain in an existing TLD. Add an opt-in for security, then start pushing for the security measure, then get browsers to start carrot-and-stick enforcing it...

It's possible to make things better.

nikanj 3 hours ago | parent

There would be great money to be made if you could auction off domain.name, instead of being stuck just getting $20 per year because some geezer registered his.domain.name.

eks391 7 hours ago | parent

So glad this happened. When I first heard, I assumed that all the folks wronged would simply be disregarded even though Verisign was blatantly breaking consumer protection laws (I assume. If it wasn't, those laws are incomplete). The fact that Verisign even tried still makes me upset though. It's really annoying what several companies will do as long as their hand isn't forced due to legal or social repercussions

kinabalu76 7 hours ago | parent

glad this got resolved, bummer it was thrown into question at all

charlieyu1 7 hours ago | parent

Good for them. I just wish I could register a new .yu domain…

xydone 6 hours ago | parent

Certainly nice to know they would've almost certainly proceeded as normal if the concerns didn't blow up online

sparkling 6 hours ago | parent

If you are into stories about weird and obscure domain happenings: https://eualternative.eu/guides/bulgaria-bg-private-registry...

zamadatix 6 hours ago | parent

Congrats to those wanting to keep their domains! I'm surprised they went with perpetual (well, as much as anything is) support, i.e. allowing renewals and such rather than just letting it naturally expire (the initial proposal was to immediately cease these records at a given date with no clear communication on how they'd be protected or not from re-registering the upper level domains or not).

nticompass 6 hours ago | parent

WHAT‽ I let my "first.last.name" registration expire because of the impending shutdown!

I did notice that my domain kept working past the supposed shutdown date, but I let the domain registration expire.

I'm so mad now! I assume there is no way to get my domain/email forwarding back :(

I suppose I could try to ask the registrar, but I highly doubt they can do anything...

(Edit: I'm not actually mad, but it was annoying to have to move accounts from my first@last.name email to another one)

_blackhawk_ 6 hours ago | parent

Definitely email the registrar. Maybe it might work?

nticompass 6 hours ago | parent

Worth a shot.

BoxOfRain 6 hours ago | parent

While it won't lessen your frustration, I applaud your use of the interrobang. That punctuation mark needs wider use.

Spivak 6 hours ago | parent

It's a neat little mark but I don't think it has much of a chance being widespread because I think ?! has already won in real usage and doesn't have the fine detail problem. I think it has a better chance of becoming an official grammatical digraph than the merged mark.

sillysaurusx 6 hours ago | parent

Is there an overlaid ?? and !! mark? (For Chess.)

adrian_b 5 hours ago | parent

Besides interrobang, Unicode includes all 4 possible sequences of 2 "?" and "!".

  203C;DOUBLE EXCLAMATION MARK;Po;0;ON;<compat> 0021 0021;;;;N;;;;;
  203D;INTERROBANG;Po;0;ON;;;;;N;;;;;
  2047;DOUBLE QUESTION MARK;Po;0;ON;<compat> 003F 003F;;;;N;;;;;
  2048;QUESTION EXCLAMATION MARK;Po;0;ON;<compat> 003F 0021;;;;N;;;;;
  2049;EXCLAMATION QUESTION MARK;Po;0;ON;<compat> 0021 003F;;;;N;;;;;

zimpenfish 3 hours ago | parent

There's DOUBLE EXCLAMATION MARK[0] and also DOUBLE QUESTION MARK[1] if those will do.

[0] https://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/203c/index.htm

[1] https://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2047/index.htm

echoangle 2 hours ago | parent

‼ ⁇

reaperducer 5 hours ago | parent

I don't think it has much of a chance being widespread

I first heard of it back when Usenet was still the hotness.

Apparently it's been around for close to a century, so if it hasn't caught on widely by now, you're probably right.

ahnick 3 hours ago | parent

> I first heard of it back when Usenet was still the hotness.

This is the first (and probably last) time that I will ever see the words "Usenet" and "hotness" in the same sentence.

Well done, sir.

saalweachter 4 hours ago | parent

It lost when computers overtook typewriters.

On a typewriter, you could type one punctuation mark, backspace, and then type another.

Even once computers added the interrobang to Unicode (or older systems), you either need to type in a numeric code, use a secret bucky bit, or select it from a graphical UI, none of which is worth it for more than the odd weirdo with a whimsical streak.

kevin_thibedeau 2 hours ago | parent

There have been video terminals that allowed overstriking glyphs.

nticompass 6 hours ago | parent

I'm not really frustrated, but it is annoying that I had to migrate accounts and stuff, but whatever.

And yes, I love the interrobang! Ever since I mapped scroll lock to "compose" on my keyboard, I've had fun typing all sorts of characters :)

lutoma 5 hours ago | parent

I have an auto substitution set up in iOS to automatically replace ?! with ‽ (Same for ellipsis, ... to …)

oneeyedpigeon 5 hours ago | parent

And, presumably, "!?"?

mzajc 6 hours ago | parent

I don't know about .name specifically, but some registries have a grace period (or multiple) after which you can still renew it. It's worth checking if you're within the time limit.

nticompass 6 hours ago | parent

That's my plan. If they can help then cool, otherwise it's not really a big deal.

edoceo 6 hours ago | parent

First time ive seen ! and ? overlaid. Neat.

BadBadJellyBean 6 hours ago | parent

It's called an interrobang. Never really took off but still available in unicode.

chch 6 hours ago | parent

For future reference, ‽ is called an interrobang!

And to show off another fun character, for languages like Spanish that start a question with an inverted question mark, there's also ⸘, the inverted interrobang.

Though I find the name some people call it, gnaborretni (interrobang backwards), much sillier.

serchinastico 6 hours ago | parent

Interesting! If we were to follow Spanish to name the inverted interrobang it'd be opening (and closing) interrobangs, not gnaborretni, just as we don't have nóicagorretni nor nóicamalcxe :)

murphyslaw 4 hours ago | parent

I assume you meant sgnaborretni?

mixdup 5 hours ago | parent

They haven't actually stopped taking third level registrations, so get in there before the revised proposal gets submitted approved and implemented

Panda4 3 hours ago | parent

I think they did. I tried to register one just now and couldn't

troyrollo 3 hours ago | parent

This is a registrar issue not a registry issue. There are registrars still allowing registration of .name domains as well as transfers in.

grimgrin 2 hours ago | parent

Any reason you didn't mention them? Seems handy. I couldn't find an example registrar accepting 3rd level name domains.

walthamstow 5 hours ago | parent

> thanks to ... Jim who flew to Bali to make the case to ICANN in person

What the heck is ICANN doing in Bali of all places?

erk__ 5 hours ago | parent

Its where their yearly general meeting was hosted: https://meetings.icann.org/en/meetings/icann87/

Last year it was in Spain and the year before it was in Mumbai.

wmf 4 hours ago | parent

It's NGO pork disguised as woke inclusion. Meetings in Africa or Asia Pacific are (theoretically) cheaper for historically disadvantaged people to attend.

bilalabdullahi 5 hours ago | parent

They shouldnt this easy to take away tbh

xyst 5 hours ago | parent

I wonder how much the midterm elections influenced Verisign in this decision to bend the knee in this "David v Goliath"-esque win.

I was expecting for Verisign to take this to court, drag it out, and bleed the opposing party out. I suppose the judges that Verisign lawyers depend on did not get favorable re-election.

Ofc it’s probably something less nefarious, and boring. Verisign probably did some basic math and determined that taking this to court with their army of overpaid lawyers was simply not cost effective compared to just supporting 3rd level domains.

asdfasdkljfhkah 5 hours ago | parent

Thousands of .name owners nearly became .gone owners. Nice to see Verisign choose the one migration plan every engineer secretly loves: don’t migrate anything.

not2b 4 hours ago | parent

I'm glad that the article writer got his domain back, but I wish we had a better term than "grandfathered". The origin of this term goes back to Jim Crow, when to stop Black people and newcomers from voting, many places in the American South imposed a near-impossible test you had to pass to register to vote, but also added a loophole: if your grandfather voted in your county (or sometimes your state), you could vote without taking the test. This was called the grandfather clause.

tln 4 hours ago | parent

"Legacied"

spicybright 2 hours ago | parent

Too nerdy but I really like this one.

EnergyAmy 3 hours ago | parent

This sort of priggishness belongs in the past, let it be

origini 4 hours ago | parent

I have bought my *.name domain a decade ago? Why was this ever a thing? Was there some limitation i'm to stupid to get or did one company just register some common last names?

ZeWaka 4 hours ago | parent

for specifically third level registrations

soupbowl 4 hours ago | parent

It is best to stick to the main top level domains. I bought into multiple 'new' domains and most of them caused me issues. A few of them jacked up their prices like crazy compared to when I first bought them. They can also be difficult to move between providers.

Unfortunately I am stuck in commitments on a few of these domains and just had to eat the cost increases, the rest I moved to .com/.net.

.consulting was the worst offender.

pmdr 3 hours ago | parent

> It is best to stick to the main top level domains.

Yes, I view most 'new' TLDs as scams. They lure you in with a low price, a rather pricey renewal and then price hike after price hike down the line. They also charge a premium for most dictionary words right from the start.

wodenokoto 2 hours ago | parent

Author has had his .name domain for 25 years, so not exactly new.

p4bl0 8 minutes ago | parent

.name is not a "new" TLD it was introduced at the same time as the .info, a bit more than 25 years back. It's not one of the new mostly scammy gTLD.

codexon 4 hours ago | parent

The title of this submission is misleading. This is only for "3rd level" .name domains. The title makes it seem like normal .name domains were being deleted.

charcircuit 4 hours ago | parent

It's disappointing that only .name got this treatment. ICANN should grandfather all domains. The idea that it's perfectly fine for domains to just disappear is ridiculous.

greyface- 2 hours ago | parent

Even if domains were permanent, nameservers and webservers would still disappear as their operators drop offline. The Internet and the Web are impermanent and require ongoing upkeep on multiple layers.

spicybright 2 hours ago | parent

Yes, but if I want to pay a register yearly for a domain and do nothing with it it shouldn't be able to be taken away.

greyface- 1 hour ago | parent

I, too, dislike the approach we've landed on of everyone placing complete trust in IANA, and having to engage politically with them or their delegates from time to time. Unfortunately, the trustless regions of Zooko's triangle are worse.

troyrollo 2 hours ago | parent

The requests for reconsideration are now part of the permanent public record - with the arguments now there for anybody to pick up in future, it is quite unlikely that there will be a repeat of this in any GTLD registry. The dodgy non-ICANN subdomains (like eu.org) are a different issue, but if you use them you take your risk.

mlefer 4 hours ago | parent

I wonder why couldn't Verisign just grant most people the second level domains here. I imagine there aren't too many people holding onto 3rd level .name domains here and the set of people holding onto 3rd level domains that share a second level domain with someone else is probably very small, a few hundred at most.

For all the ones holding exclusive second level domains, just give them the second level domain. For all the ones holding shared second levels, offer a buyout and/or allow parties to negotiate with each other on a shared ownership structure of the second level.

toast0 3 hours ago | parent

I suspect for most of the second level domains, there's only one registrant of a third level domain.

However, I also suspect that for most of the third level domains, they're on a second level domain with multiple registrants. And several of those shared second level domains will have a lot of registrants. If the registrants are in different jurisdictions, it becomes a pretty nasty process to develop international consensus, vs just keeping the status quo going (which IMHO, can't be that hard).

Still, it makes sense to have a process to normalize the single registrant second level domains, because less work.

troyrollo 3 hours ago | parent

22,000 third levels total, spread across about 12,000 second levels, about 10,000 of which have only one third level. Of the approximately 2,000 with multiples, many have all of the third level registrants being apparently close relatives.

That leaves quite a few with lots of unrelated registrants, mostly in Japan (tanaka and suzuki being the biggest).

p4bl0 5 minutes ago | parent

I got hold of the complete .name zone file. Indeed, it contains 22117 third-level .name domains among which 10372 are unique under their second-level.

See https://p4bl0.net/post/2026/10/VeriSign-is-VeriShit (I haven't yet had the time to update that blog post with this last news discussed here).

eloto333 4 hours ago | parent

I want to edit this comment.

damoe 4 hours ago | parent

A few years ago I was able to register <first name>.<last name> I was so excited until I realized how potentially precarious the domain was. My established domain is <first><last>.<forever tdl>. I'm not too worried about it having a problem (although as some have mentioned here I wish we had more rights, as individuals, to this IP). So I keep the new domain more as a personal toy...

slow_typist 3 hours ago | parent

Nicely done. (I moved a few family email accounts from .name to .net years ago because it was a much cheaper option and the .name TLD was still so uncommon in our bubbles it led to questions when they gave their email addresses to someone else.)

calebio 3 hours ago | parent

Kind of off-topic, but I wonder what will happen to .io in the end.

Xirdus 3 hours ago | parent

Most likely nothing. .su was kept around and it was million times smaller than .io is now.

hoppp 3 hours ago | parent

Congrats!!

greyface- 2 hours ago | parent

Can anyone speak to which specific registrars support setting email forwarding settings with these domains?

RagnarD 1 hour ago | parent

Here's what I don't understand: if Verisign is too lame to continue handling .name domains, why wouldn't ICANN insist that it auction off that TLD to someone who isn't, and just take control of it and do it themselves if they don't?

minimaxa 1 hour ago | parent

Well done, sometimes it's about the principal.

Why do they care about third-level domain names anyway, not really much admin costs leaving them active.

Now you can join us in 2026 and work on your website design and remove that hideous lavender background color? :)

thbb123 39 minutes ago | parent

I've spent the past month setting up a new domain and feverishly tracking every contact and website that had my address to update what needed to be. Glad to know it was for nothing.

And one good aspect of this is that I hope I'll get less spam as a result.