If you're publishing a domain name that is supposed to be an example or test domain, there are some reserved TLDs for that! And you never have to register or maintain them!
domain.example is encouraged for documentation, but you can also use something like example.invalid.
Whenever I review unit tests that have URLs in them, I insist that they use the .invalid TLD. I know that .test is encouraged, but I find that .invalid stands out more when you're browsing a test suite.
The old argument against this was that the average person is really only familiar with .com, .org, and maybe .net, and they wouldn't even recognize something with a less commonly used TLD as a domain name.
But with the rise in popularity of alternate TLDs, I don't think that argument is as persuasive anymore.
I remember way back, I think 2006 or around that time, Google forgot to register Google.com and someone (I think from microsoft) had registered it, then gave it back.
Yeah, the "redemption period" is what you're thinking of. As far as I know, only the person who last owned the domain can get it out of that status (usually at a premium cost). After 30 days, anyone can register it.
i once noticed that Google failed to renew SSL to its AI website, and SSL expiry warning was thrown..
1) Noticed bug..
2) waited 4 hours, to make sure it is an issue
3) reported bug
4) the issue got fixed
5) got an update next day that it was not a issue (though i had screenshots)
laughed and promised myself that i will never submit another bug to Google ;)
I wonder what would happen in terms of traffic level if microsoft ever forgot to renew contoso.com , and somebody registered it and pointed its MX at a mail server they control.
15 comments
[ 4.4 ms ] story [ 33.9 ms ] threadhttps://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ellermann-idnabis-test-tlds-...
domain.example is encouraged for documentation, but you can also use something like example.invalid.
Whenever I review unit tests that have URLs in them, I insist that they use the .invalid TLD. I know that .test is encouraged, but I find that .invalid stands out more when you're browsing a test suite.
The old argument against this was that the average person is really only familiar with .com, .org, and maybe .net, and they wouldn't even recognize something with a less commonly used TLD as a domain name.
But with the rise in popularity of alternate TLDs, I don't think that argument is as persuasive anymore.
So if you want to demonstrate what a working domain looks like you need something else.
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gtld-lifecycle-2012-02... has a graphic explaining a typical domain lifecycle.
laughed and promised myself that i will never submit another bug to Google ;)
Small nitpick: this is spottedfig dot com, a domain which they still control.