• HikingVet@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Probably something to do with .af being the domain for Afghanistan. Wouldn’t be the first country to seize something with their domain that they didn’t like.

    • neidu2@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      From my limited knowledge of how lemmy works: The domain is integral to how it registers with the federation, as well as how an instance functions.

        • neidu2@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          As a network admin dealing mostly with servers, routing, VPNs, I mostly prefer statically addressed IPv4 as identifiers, but this also has issues as it’s at the mercy of the ISP… luckily for me my network is only addressed internally over VPN, so all of the ~2000 hosts for which I am responsible reside on the 172.16.0.0/13 address space, where I am the dictator and BOFH.

            • neidu2@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Yeah, I don’t remember where I was going with the above, to be honest. Probably expressing my distain for DNS as an operational requirement instead of a convenient option.

              I haven’t dug deeply myself either, but I don’t see why instances can’t connect together dynamically, independent from address or hostname, instead using key exchange to authenticate. FQDN being such an integral part of the functionality is a huge liability

                • neidu2@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  That’s an example of an optional convenience, with which I have no problem.

                  Would any sensible person use DNS for accessing your site? Yes
                  When the amish take control of the .vip TLD in an effort to ban automotive transport, will you have to build the site up from scratch just because you give it a new domain? No.

                  I don’t remember the details, but there was a post ago made by an instance admin who could no longer use the domain name he has built his lemmy instance around, and (according to the comments, at least) that basically meant that he had to scrap everything and start over.

        • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          the morons who registered teh domain, signed it over to the government ‘for safe keeping’ and then the government turned into the literal taliban.

          dont sign your domains over to some foreign power or youre gunna have a bad time

        • tiramichu@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s got nothing to do with Mastodon. Mastodon did not “comply” because Mastodon has no say one way or the other.

          Where TLDs are associated with particular countries then the national registrar for that country controls who is allocated domains under it.

          Example: ‘.fr’ is associated with France and is controlled by a French organisation.

          ‘.af’ is similarly controlled by an Afghanistan organisation and they can choose to grant or revoke ownership of domains under that TLD however they like.

          The Mastodon instance will need to move to a new domain.

            • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              This is the internet equivalent of choosing to open a gay bar in Kabul instead of San Francisco.

              There were plenty of safe spaces, they chose terribly.

            • tiramichu@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              Some amount of centralisation in domain management is necessary, in order to agree who owns what.

              Devolving control of TLDs to respective nations was actually a GOOD idea because it means each country can operate those TLDs in a way that fits their needs, which is already much better than all global TLDs being operated by a single organisation.

              The main mistake is that queer .af chose to register a domain controlled by a government who was very likely to have problems with what they were using it for.

              Nowadays there are a large number of ‘new’ TLDs which are not nationally controlled and may be a better choice.

            • admiralteal@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              The national top-level domains are MEANT to be controlled by their relevant nation-states. They are not intended to be part of vanity URLs.

              So there’s nothing to “fix” here. This is the system working as intended, basically.

  • Menteros@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Based Taliban.

    But go on about how Islam is compatible with western values. I’ll wait for you on the sidewalk under a tall building.

  • Kabaka@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I have two .af domain names that got suspended as well. I don’t even think they had a single DNS record set right now, but I had short-term plans for them. Oh well.

  • tygerprints@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I have to admit that I am Talibanphobic. I hate them, as I hate all small brained twits without balls. The more they hate gay people, the more gay people must infiltrate the spaces where they are and shit on them publically. We all should be as in their face and openly gay as is possible in their presence. Their small brains can only threaten our lives, but can never take our power or our spirits away.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m simultaneously amused and appalled.

    The amusement is from the Taliban being so sensitive they can’t even allow a domain with ‘queer’ in the name to be associated with .af as if anyone anywhere outside maybe Afghanistan itself associates .af with Afghanistan.

    The reason I’m appalled should be obvious.

  • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Firstly, the domain was seized, the instance remains though is effectively orphaned due to how instances work. You should change your title to “queer.af domain seized from mastodon instance by Taliban” to make things clearer.

    Secondly, you seem to be under the impression there’s some sort of way around this? A TLD controlled by a foreign government (whether you like it or not) retook a domain. It’s similar to the US having control of .us or Canada having control of .ca.

    So to make things fun, I’ll point out that yes, technically it is possible to “work around” the issue and keep the domain name. Notice I said, and stressed, the word “technically”. Because you likely have a better chance of Trump admitting to a crime and voluntarily going to jail than it happening.