How many top-level domains are there?
Short answer — not enough, though hopefully there will be new gTLDs within the year. But here’s what I found interesting:
In the last six years more ccTLDs have been added to the root than gTLDs.
The total number of top-level domains is put very nicely in graphical form by Kim Davies on the ICANN Blog, which I copy below:
But this chart got me thinking, and after a little research I confirmed my suspicion. Since January 1, 2003, more ccTLDs have been added than gTLDs. This means that the ICANN process is even slower than political one. This is the first good argument for control of the root by the U.N. that I have seen.
Here are the lists:
ccTLDs added since January 1, 2003
- .tl – East Timor (2005)
- .eu – Europe (2005)
- .bl – Saint Bartholomew (2007)
- .kp – North Korea (2007)
- .me – Montenegro (2007)
- .mf – Saint Martin – French side (2007)
- .rs – Serbia (2007)
- .ax – Aland Islands (2008)
gTLDs added since Jan 1, 2003
- .cat (2005)
- .jobs (2005)
- .mobi (2005)
- .travel (2005)
- .asia (2007)
- .tel (2007)
In fairness, since the inception of ICANN, there have been two more gTLDs added than ccTLDs, though this is nothing to brag about. But the trend is certainly in favor of the ccTLDs. Since the “flood” of four in 2005, only two gTLDs have been added, while the ccTLD side counts six.
When TLD-deniers say “go slow,” I have to ask, how much slower can we go?
Although I understand your frustration about new gTLDs timeline, TBH I think you are comparing pears and apples here.
Adding a ccTLD to the root is basically a purely administrative process, based on 2 principles: the code needs to be in the ISO list, and the TLD should be delegated to someone representing the local community.
There is nothing political in this process, and indeed when a political discussion breaks out around a ccTLD delegation (like it was the case of .EH not too long ago) the decision is put on hold until the political argument is resolved elsewhere.
New gTLDs are instead still very much object of a political discussion on the basic principles regulating the expansion, mostly because people still do not agree whether there should be new gTLDs to start with, and who should be entitled to apply under which conditions.
I am personally not very impressed with the current situation of this process, and although I do personally support a few of the new gTLDs applicants I would rather wait and do it properly, than rush it through and end up with a bad compromise (then again, by the way things look so far, I am not sure we’ll ever get a good compromise, so we might as well go ahead with what we have now and see what happens).
@Francesco – my point is simply that things are too slow.
However, we should talk. I’m not sure where you’re getting your information, but ccTLD delegations are neither pure not purely administrative, and they are most certainly political.
I would like to know what you mean by “wait and do it properly,” because I have heard this phrase before but I have never heard anyone explain what “properly” means. As far as I can tell, it just means never having new TLDs.
The point of my post is that 10 years of waiting is not “rushing it through,” in your words. In fact, the delay has already been very costly to the Internet.
In those 10 years, we have seen the creation of several alternate roots that people actually use, in Arab countries, Israel, China, etc. So there is a risk to NOT letting new TLDs happen, and that risk is a fractured Internet. If you think brand owners have a problem now, ask them how they would like to police trademarks on multiple Internets.
I was following some of the sessions in Mexico remotely and the one word that sprang to mind was “fear”
(Longer blog post on this to follow)
Basically they are trying to avoid making any decisions on anything out of fear.
While some of the fears may have *some* basis a lot of the “arguments” that have led to the delay are simply delaying tactics.
What amuses me is all the media coverage that the misinformed media have been spreading about how “easy” it will be to get all these new TLDs up and running.
Michele
Hi Anthony
I totally agree with you that this whole process has been taking a ridiculous amount of time, and it makes me really sorry because I do think we could have used a few more TLDs earlier (the .IDNs you refer too are one example of how this whole process has taken a completely crazy turn long time ago).
TBH I personally couldn’t care less of brand owners’ problems, and in a lot of cases my personal opinion is that the mess we are in right now has them (and the lawyers that represent them) as the principal responsibles.
It is exactly the mess the new gTLDs process is in right now, which penalizes the most those application I personally rank among the more useful ones (a lot of them without a big pile of cash to support them), that makes me say that maybe we should wait and do it properly.
At the same time I did also say that I don’t believe we’ll ever see a significantly better solution than the one we have right now, so we might as well go ahead with what we have and see what happens (in other words, I am totally with you… let us just put an end at this misery once and for all and move on…)
Lastly, my point about ccTLDs delegations not being political is based on the simple fact that if any discussion does happen regarding their delegation, it is not about whether a specific territory should have the right to a specific string (because that question is already solved elsewhere, in the ISO list) and it certainly does not happen at ICANN, but rather at a more local level: if ccTLDs worked like gTLDs, then probably a lot of people would have objected to the very obscene use of a TLD done by the Cook Islands
What makes ccTLDs and gTLDs fundamentally different is that for the ccTLDs the basic rules have been set long ago (by Jon Postel, who in a way delegated that decision to ISO), where when it comes to gTLDs we are still very much discussing (and disagreeing strongly on) those basic principles (in particular the who decides who gets what and how), before we start even discussing the specific applications.
Ciao
/F
ccTLD delegations