[edit] Adding <br> tags

If you are getting one long line that is not word wrapping, it is either a bug in the browser or a bug in the CSS for the page. Either way it should be able to be fixed with CSS changes.

Adding <br> tags actually makes it look much worse for everyone else. For example, with the 03:20 29 Sep 2004 revision, with these extra tags, it looks like this for me:

The problem with this approach is that everyone's browser is a different width, and many people use different fonts or font sizes. Therefore what looks good on your browser will look bad on someone elses. So basically, please fix the HTML so it word wraps independent of screen size, rather than adding <br> tags. --kjd 15:09, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've noticed that there seems to be many similarities between the ccTLDs in the "deleted/retired" and the "renamed" categories. For example, why are .su and .zr in different categories if they are under essentially the same circumstances? I suggest that these two categories be merged somehow. --Zippanova 18:38, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Formatting changes

I've reformatted the template:

• lost a bunch of white space at the left and bottom, so it's now 7 lines deep, rather than 13
• removed the vertical bars, which make it harder to read along the line; they aren't really needed in this kind of template, because it's clear that each word is a separate link
• increased the font size, because it was hard to read at 82%

Given all this, I'd appreciate knowing why I was reverted :) sjorford (?!) 09:29, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

In Opera, and IE, it's showing up as one massive line for all "Active" and then everything else on the next line. Horrible mess. Will revert again - sorry, but something's wrong here. Shimgray 01:32, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Damn, so it is. That'll teach me for using Firefox :) I suspect it could be to do with the width="100%" attributes - investigating. sjorford #£@%&$?! 08:18, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Okay, should be fixed now - it was the dots at the start of each word that was causing the browsers to run them together as a single word. I've added &nbsp; before each dot to fool it. Can anyone confirm that this works in Opera, I don't have it installed right now. sjorford #£@%&$?! 10:32, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Good in Opera and IE. Thanks! Shimgray 12:36, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] .gb

Should .gb be moved to the "retired" category? This TLD is already disused and all the subdomains have moved to .uk. --Deryck C. 05:46, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

i just came on this talk page to ask the same question. my answer is "yes", so i'm doing it now. tomasz. 13:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Double domen

.bv is Active and Allocated/unused. Mistake? Leonarh 12:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Removed in "active", according [1] (the link is from IANA site). Cate | _Talk 09:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] .um status not correct

The t/p currently has .um under the "deleted/retired" heading. This isn't correct. According to the ICANN report on the change:

ICANN's view is that this would be an appropriate action, and would not prevent a suitably qualified operator from running .UM in the future if they met all the normal criteria for delegation of a ccTLD.
The Chair said there might be side effects if people are using software that tests for the existence of valid country-code domains. He added that as long as there was widespread notice of the re-delegation, then this should not be an issue.
Paul Twomey pointed out that this would be the first country-code domain to be removed from the root that wasn't the result of ISO 3166 changes caused by a country changing its name or dissolving (such as Zaire and Czechoslovakia). Kim Davies clarified that this would bring the list of undelegated country-codes to five, the others being Montenegro (ME), North Korea (KP), Serbia (RS), and Western Sahara (EH).

In other words, .um has not been deleted. It's now unassigned. If what i'm reading is correct; .um could be headed for a comeback if someone meets the rules to operate it.

Again, according to the ICANN report:

Following this discussion Susan Crawford moved and Rita Rodin seconded a request for a vote on the following resolution:
Whereas, the .UM top-level domain was originally delegated in December 1997 <http://www.iana.org/root-whois/um.htm>.
Whereas, the currently assigned operator is the University of Southern California's Information Sciences Institute.
Whereas, the .UM domain is not in active use, and the current operator no longer wishes to operate it.
Whereas, ICANN has reviewed the request, and has determined that the returning the domain to unassigned status is the appropriate action to reflect its status.
Recognizing, this would not prohibit future delegation of the domain to another party that meets the regular ccTLD delegation criteria.
Resolved (07.04), that the delegation of .UM be removed from the DNS root, and that it be returned to unassigned status.
The Board approved the resolution by roll call vote 12-0. In addition to the Board Members not present for the call, Steve Goldstein was not available to vote.

So, to sum up, .um is now unassigned. - Thanks, Hoshie 22:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

.. but still, http://www.nic.um/ works!

um.                     172800  IN      NS      NS.UU.NET.
um.                     172800  IN      NS      NS.ISI.EDU.
um.                     172800  IN      NS      VENERA.ISI.EDU.

ZorroIII 23:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

According to the IANA whois, .um is still assigned to the United States Minor Outlying Islands Registry. I think it will remain assigned until it has been deleted from the root (which, as ZorroIII points out, hasn't happened yet). --Zundark 10:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Samspin 14:10, 21 April 2008 (GMT)

As of April 20th 2008, this domain has been removed from the root zone and so is now offically unnassigned.

[edit] .yu

Shuldn't .yu be moved into the Phaseout category??? Even though it is stated as active, I don't see why it is anymore less retired than .su
— ChrisDHDR ^{FøřůM • €D!†$} 20:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

No, it shouldn't. .su is listed by Iana as being phased out. .yu is not. ---80.144.97.3 23:34, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] .dd

Shouldn't there be a link to .dd? I don't know which category it pertains... .dd was available to be assigned but was never indeed. In any case, there is a Wikipedia entry about it, so it should appear linked in the template. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.40.24.23 (talk) 00:08, 17 March 2008 (UTC)