[stephen_g]

It did always make me really annoyed they didn’t deprecate .gov, .edu and .mil and transition to moving those under .us (as .gov.us, .edu.us and .mil.us).

Having them as basically US-only just reeks of American exceptionalism which most of the world finds very distasteful.

[Scoundreller]

I wonder if some anti-“west” military alliances are eligible to get their own .int just like nato.int

[Symbiote]

There's a list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organizations_with_.in...

I don't see why a non-western military alliance wouldn't be eligible, so long as the meet the criteria — treaty registered with the UN etc.

[ViscountPenguin]

Even if they dejure meet the requirements, I suspect that IANA would be under heavy political pressure to deny the claim.

[walletdrainer]

I suspect that exactly no-one cares about .int domains

[dragonwriter]

They would, but even orgs that have historically had .int domains tend to move off them to either their own TLD (like CERN moving to .cern) or to other gTLDs (like the Commonwealth of Nations from commonwealth.int to commonwealth.org.) Ironically, NATO was using .nato briefly in 1990 before moving to .nato.int

So, CSTO using csto.org rather than csto.int is probably just keeping up with the times, not failing to get an .int

[zokier]

I'm annoyed that Postel didn't deprecate .com/.net/.org after ccTLDs were introduced. Would have made DNS so much cleaner and at least have a chance of making the hierarchy/tld somewhat meaningful.

[drnick1]

Cope with it, America invented the Internet so yes, we are exceptional and have every right to use whatever TLDs we created first.

[bigstrat2003]

I don't think there's any reason to deprecate .edu and move it under the us TLD. Nothing about .edu is US-specific, unlike gov and mil. You could perfectly reasonably have oxford.edu, etc.

[6031769]

They already have it and it redirects to the real Oxford site.