@fribbledom hmm, someone brought this up in my computer networking class and the professor said... it wasn't important??

@ibagail

It is a problem for anyone who cares about DNS and/or security. Maybe your professor doesn't belong to either group :thaenkin:

@fribbledom @ibagail Even regardless of security its just a really fuarking dumb thing to do, AND its been implemented poorly and inconsistently.

If I have layer01.www.www.m.layer02.www.p7.co.nz that will get shortened to layer01.layer02.p7.co.nz

@tA @fribbledom yeah i read the thread and that shit looks UH OH

@ibagail
@tA @fribbledom
Why does the presence or absence of the www make a difference? Are there websites not on the web?

@DialMforMara @ibagail @fribbledom

so technically, the www. in front of a website is just a subdomain, like how layer13.p7.co.nz is, and www.website.com and website.com can be two completely different websites, even run by different people in some cases

@tA @ibagail @fribbledom yeah, I got that far on my own, but why is that allowed and/or not prevented?

@DialMforMara @tA @ibagail

Are you talking about the technical possibility to point these to two different addresses, or what the Chrome devs are doing?

@fribbledom @tA @ibagail I want to know why it's possible for those two addresses to point to different places. You'd think there'd be some technical reason why they wouldn't, or that the W3C would attempt to put their foot down

@DialMforMara @tA @ibagail

Well, as the domain owner / DNS operator you can configure your DNS to respond in anyway you please. "www" is just a subdomain like every other.

The better question is: why did we ever start to prefix websites with a subdomain "www", when the service is already differentiated by the TCP port.

Legacy reasons I guess, the web was always an afterthought (and hence running on a separate server with its own IP) and not the primary goal of the Internet.

@fribbledom @tA @ibagail so were there enumerated alternatives to www that named different domain spaces, or as it anything goes and this one just caught on?

@DialMforMara @tA @ibagail

Anything goes, and with the commercialization of the web it became the de-facto standard.

Something prefixed with a "www." was immediately recognizable as a website address to everyone, and they could get rid of the "ugly" http:// in their ads.

@fribbledom @tA @ibagail speaking of http://, are there other transfer protocols still in use on the internet, and do they ever show up in urls?

@DialMforMara @tA @ibagail

More than you would think. You don't usually see them, since they are mostly implied by the program you use, but here are a few examples:

ftp:// irc:// gopher:// smtp:// imap:// ...

There are literally thousands of established protocols, which are all based on TCP or UDP, but the average user will only ever hear about http and maybe ftp.

Follow

@fribbledom @DialMforMara @tA @ibagail And under most systems with app marketplaces now, you've got bespoke app-specific protocols flying around for data transmission, like the Win 10 UWP Twitter app registering twitter:// URLs for opening stuff directly in their app.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
weirder.earth

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!