23

Is there any convention on possible naming for local domain names (like .local), apart from not using any possible or existing top-level domain?

Wikipedia says that

  • .local conflicts with zeroconf
  • .localhost is reserved, but is traditionally translated statically to 127.0.0.1
  • .site and .internal are discussed
6

In 2018, IETF approved RFC 8375 reserving .home.arpa for use in home networks. (Although the specification is from the Homenet WG, it explicitly states that the name is meant to be usable in any home LAN and not just HNCP-managed LANs.)

(The reason for the two-level name is that .arpa is under IETF's direct control and it is enough to just have an approved RFC to create a domain under it, while the root zone is under ICANN management and creating a special TLD would involve much more bureaucracy.)

0
22

The question has been treated in detail on ServerFault. Executive summary; do not use .local or another dummy TLD, use a real domain.

0
12

dan bernstein (of qmail fame) has a site dedicated to choosing a dnsname for the local network (http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/dot-local.html):

It isn't easy to choose a safe top-level local name. The global root
operators add new top-level names every once in a while: for example,
.info was added in 2001, so people using .info as a local name were
unable to reach global .info sites. Software authors sometimes set 
aside top-level names; for example, I'm told that Mac OS 9 does something
weird with .local, so it can't access local names in .local. Here are 
some reasonable choices of top-level local names:

 .0       (good for machine-specific names)
 .1
 .2
 .3       (good for department-specific names)
 .4
 .5
 .6       (good for corporation-specific names)
 .7
 .8
 .9
 .internal
0
1

Nope.

There is no official naming convention for private domains, because they're private.

1
  • 3
    But the chosen naming might conflict at some point (with new TLDs or network services), so a convention would be useful and should be discussed!
    – nidi
    Mar 7 '10 at 11:16
0

It looks like .home and .corp won't be delegated anytime soon!

The proposed gTLDs .home and .corp create risks to the internet comparable to the Millennium Bug, which terrorized a burgeoning internet at the turn of the century, and should be rejected.

Meanwhile, every other gTLD that has been applied for in the current round could be delayed by months in order to mitigate the risks they pose to internet users.

New gTLDs are the new Y2K: .corp and .home are doomed and everything else is delayed and .home

1
  • 1
    In the future please submit proper answers. Link-only answers are not helpful. I improved your answer so it's acceptable. In the future I will just vote to delete answers like the original revision. Signatures are just added noise, they are not allowed, in Superuser answers.
    – Ramhound
    Oct 20 '16 at 20:55

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.