1025002 - et domains are now registrable at the 2nd level.

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core Graveyard :: Networking: Domain Lists, defect)

Description

[Ben Cartwright-Cox]

Attachment: Patch to correct this.

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_9_3) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/35.0.1916.153 Safari/537.36

Steps to reproduce:

People are can register example.et


Actual results:

example.et (A real example is vi.et) is not matched in this list.


Expected results:

It should of been matched since it is a valid domain

Comment 1

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

Hi Ben,

Thanks for the patch. Can you point us at your source for this info and for the 2LD list?

Thanks,

Gerv

Comment 2

[Ben Cartwright-Cox]

Hey Gerv,

You can find the info here: http://www.ethionet.et/?q=ipservicedomainname

For the ones that are not on there, they where mentioned on the wikipedia page, so I don't want to rule them out of the list even though the ethionet page does not list them.

Comment 3

[Tobias Sattler]

There is no Whois server available and it doesn't seem like there are other registrars for .et domain names. I checked with a bunch sites and it is really hard to revalidate. Based on the information give by Ben and the registry (ethio telecom) at least .et, .com.et, .org.et, .net.et, .gov.et and .edu.et seems correct. I cannot 100% validate .biz.et, .info.et and .name.et, but they have the same NS, A and AAAA records as the TLDs mentioned on the registry website.

Comment 4

[Ben Cartwright-Cox]

I can find .biz.et and .info.et domains in the wild:

http://www.nefas.biz.et/
http://www.slmethiopia.info.et/

However I cannot find .name.et

Should I take that out of the patch?

Comment 5

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

I like Tobias' method of looking for DNS similarity. 

I think we should go with the patch as-is based on that.

Gerv

Comment 6

[Ben Cartwright-Cox]

Hi, So what is the next action that I or someone else needs to do? Shall I take out .biz.et, .info.et and .name.et of the patch?

Thanks

Comment 7

[Tobias Sattler]

I think we should go with the patch as-is.

Comment 8

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

Comment on attachment 8439892 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch to correct this.

r=gerv on this patch, although it will need regenerating in Hg-compatible format.

Gerv

Comment 9

[Ben Cartwright-Cox]

Is this somthing that I need to do? In addition do I get authorship of the Hg commit?

Thanks

Comment 10

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

Attachment: Patch v.2

Comment 11

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

No, I've done it. And yes, you get authorship of the commit - see the metadata at the top of the patch.

Gerv

Comment 12

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/c5f3e46fae05

Comment 13

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/c5f3e46fae05