.ORG Is Different? A Quantitative Investigation
[ Introduction - Domain Registrations - Domain Usage - Conclusions & Implications - Motivation ]
Abstract: Since the 199? opening of .COM, .NET, and .ORG to automated fixed-price registrations without human review or approval, it has been thought that the .ORG "non-commercial," "organizational," or even "miscallensous" flavor has become [mixed] with the commercial .COM. However, data collected by the author suggests that in fact certain characteristics of .ORG vary substantailly from .COM. In particular, .ORG domains are found to be put to active use more frequently than .COM domains, are found to offer simpler web pages (with less Javascript, JAVA, and other software code), and are found to persist over time [more often].
When Postel created COM, NET, and ORG, he wrote [cite RFC} charters for each space. Initially charters enforced since registrations by hand. Might get comments from Postel, assistant, or later Network Solutions saying that .COM or .NET would be more appropriate. And the folks doing registrations were savvier to begin with.
With the rise of for-fee registrations, Network Solutions found their incentives switched. Rather than wanting to discourage duplicative, speculative, or otherwise not-immediately-necessary registrations, Network Solutions' profit motive now called for the encouragement of such registrations. In particular, encouragement of defensive registration of .NET and .ORG even when a company initially wanted and primarily sought to use only the corresponding .COM. When a .COM requested but not available, suggesting .ORG or .NET instead.
In this context, many registrants seem to have come to treat .COM, .NET, and .ORG as interchangeable. For-profits have been known to register .COMs (example), while non-profits register .COMs and .NETs (examples include the Computer Coalition for Responsible Experts using ccre.net; more??).
On this basis, one might well fear that .COM, .NET, and .ORG had become for most purposes indistinguishable. However, the remainder of this research will suggest the contrary, showing differences between, in particular, .COM and .ORG, and arguing that in fact the TLDs have notably and quantifiably different characteristics.
Analysis begins with reporting of the number of domains registered and certain key characteristics of those domains.
number of domains registered
extent to which .COM includes more undesirable domains -- with dashes, longer lengths
amount of sexually-explicit content - xxx, sex, nude. While these keywords may not in every instance be associated with sexually-explicit content, the relative prevalence of such terms in domain registrations is likely indicative of
Provision of web pages
Given the emphasis in Internet usage on provision of web content, one sensible measure of domain usage is provision of web pages. Of course, domains can also be used for purposes other than providing web content; for example, a given domain may be used only for email. However, if such usage is roughly equal across TLDs, it little affects conclusions about the rate of usage of domains. In the table below, I report first the proportion of domain registrations associated with working web servers that produce valud HTTP responses. I subsequently report the proportion of domains actually offering web content on their default web pages. Availability of actual web content is as inferred from HTML titles; a domains is said to provide actual content if it provides an valid response to a request for its default web page, if that response has an HTML HEAD title, and if that title is neither an error page nor "under construction" (or similar).
| .COM | .NET | .ORG | |
| Has a working web server | |||
| Provides actual web content (not "under construction" or "error") |
Implications. .ORG has about the same amount of working content. Speculate that this reflects an interaction of effects, including defensive registrations by holders of .COMs (reducing the rate at which .ORG domains provide web content) and active use by .ORG registrants (increasing the rate at which .ORG domains provide web content).
Characteristics of web content offered
TLDs vary
kinds of pages offered - page length, javascript, css. As the table below shows, .ORG pages use Javascript to a lesser extent than do .COMs.
google using gibberish / site:.com technique. number of indexed pages in each TLD. number with certain words. Repeat "xxx" "sex" etc. Analysis relative to domain registrations, relative to working domains in each TLD, relative to Google-indexed pages.
old yahoo tenure/survival; new yahoo additions
Conclusions, Future Work, and Policy Implications
How to understand rebid of .ORG in this context. Other implications.f
addl concl
The purpose of this work is primarily academic -- .... For example, evaluation of criteria for the redelegation of the .ORG registry suggested that ... that ICANN and the DNSO may in the future consider consensus policies that restrict .ORG usage or create a new domain that actively enforces the restrictions previously implemented in .ORG only by convention.....