Is www redundant

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Collector, May 11, 2004.

  1. Collector

    Collector Guest

    Not the web itself but the prefix on domain names of www.

    Watching TV tonight and an add came on for a Dymo labeling machine, it
    was PC connected and geeky enough to warrent a look since I had a
    workstation in front of me I went to the site that they gave, verballly
    called out as dymo.co.nz, page error, so I poked the www in front and
    got the site!
    Now the onscreen of the URL had the www.dymo.co.nz.

    When I put up a site I make sure both www.domain and domain resolve to
    the correct pages, but so many others do not.

    Do we need the www anymore?
     
    Collector, May 11, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Collector

    Keith Guest

    In article <40a09484$>,
    says...
    > Not the web itself but the prefix on domain names of www.
    >
    > Watching TV tonight and an add came on for a Dymo labeling machine, it
    > was PC connected and geeky enough to warrent a look since I had a
    > workstation in front of me I went to the site that they gave, verballly
    > called out as dymo.co.nz, page error, so I poked the www in front and
    > got the site!
    > Now the onscreen of the URL had the www.dymo.co.nz.
    >
    > When I put up a site I make sure both www.domain and domain resolve to
    > the correct pages, but so many others do not.
    >
    > Do we need the www anymore?


    Or for that matter the protocol prefix (ie "http://")
     
    Keith, May 11, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <>, Keith <> wrote:
    >In article <40a09484$>,
    >says...

    *SNIP*
    >Or for that matter the protocol prefix (ie "http://")


    The protocol prefix is essential, even if it's not explicity stated.
    Since you can attach multiple protocols to a particular URL, excluding
    the protocol identifier will then require changes to host naming
    conventions.

    --
    Matthew Poole Auckland, New Zealand
    "Veni, vidi, velcro...
    I came, I saw, I stuck around"

    My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
     
    Matthew Poole, May 11, 2004
    #3
  4. In article <c7q7lf$knj$>, "cowboyz" <> wrote:
    >Newsman wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> If it's a .com address typing, say, dymo and hitting ctrl+Enter will
    >> paste the full www.dymo.com address into the browser.

    >
    >
    >That is interesting. Is there somewhere you can change the ctrl+enter to
    >make it put .co.nz instead of .com? Very handy. Using IE6 BTW.
    >

    Get XTeq, and it allows you to set five choices for IE to use when
    filling out incomplete address entries.
    I modify it so that it searches .co.nz then .net.nz then .com, for those
    increasingly rare occasions when I use IE - FireFox is accepted even
    more widely than Visa :)

    --
    Matthew Poole Auckland, New Zealand
    "Veni, vidi, velcro...
    I came, I saw, I stuck around"

    My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
     
    Matthew Poole, May 11, 2004
    #4
  5. Collector

    Invisible Guest

    On Tue, 11 May 2004 20:49:41 +1200, Collector <> wrote:

    >Not the web itself but the prefix on domain names of www.
    >
    >Watching TV tonight and an add came on for a Dymo labeling machine, it
    >was PC connected and geeky enough to warrent a look since I had a
    >workstation in front of me I went to the site that they gave, verballly
    >called out as dymo.co.nz, page error, so I poked the www in front and
    >got the site!
    >Now the onscreen of the URL had the www.dymo.co.nz.
    >
    >When I put up a site I make sure both www.domain and domain resolve to
    >the correct pages, but so many others do not.
    >
    >Do we need the www anymore?
    >

    Hopefully not... and hopefully it'll mean the end of fuckin DUB-DUB-DUB.
     
    Invisible, May 11, 2004
    #5
  6. Collector

    Newsman Guest

    On Tue, 11 May 2004 20:49:41 +1200, Collector
    <> wrote:

    >Not the web itself but the prefix on domain names of www.
    >
    >Watching TV tonight and an add came on for a Dymo labeling machine, it
    >was PC connected and geeky enough to warrent a look since I had a
    >workstation in front of me I went to the site that they gave, verballly
    >called out as dymo.co.nz, page error, so I poked the www in front and
    >got the site!
    >Now the onscreen of the URL had the www.dymo.co.nz.
    >
    >When I put up a site I make sure both www.domain and domain resolve to
    >the correct pages, but so many others do not.
    >
    >Do we need the www anymore?


    If it's a .com address typing, say, dymo and hitting ctrl+Enter will
    paste the full www.dymo.com address into the browser.
     
    Newsman, May 11, 2004
    #6
  7. Collector

    Jason M Guest

    On Tue, 11 May 2004 09:22:00 GMT, (Newsman)
    wrote:

    >If it's a .com address typing, say, dymo and hitting ctrl+Enter will
    >paste the full www.dymo.com address into the browser.


    Use Mozilla and just type dymo Enter
     
    Jason M, May 11, 2004
    #7
  8. Collector

    Max Barwell Guest

    On Tue, 11 May 2004 20:49:41 +1200, Collector wrote:

    > Not the web itself but the prefix on domain names of www.
    >
    > Watching TV tonight and an add came on for a Dymo labeling machine, it
    > was PC connected and geeky enough to warrent a look since I had a
    > workstation in front of me I went to the site that they gave, verballly
    > called out as dymo.co.nz, page error, so I poked the www in front and
    > got the site!
    > Now the onscreen of the URL had the www.dymo.co.nz.
    >
    > When I put up a site I make sure both www.domain and domain resolve to
    > the correct pages, but so many others do not.
    >
    > Do we need the www anymore?


    Thats a bit of a strange one, on most modern browsers, if you just put in
    example.com, it slings the www in for you, albeit behind the scenes, does
    it not?
    But i have noticed that sometimes i have to manually make sure i put in
    the www before a url will work, i guess its something to do with how they
    have their dns setup.
    On a related note, i have noticed url's in the form of web.example.com,
    and saw a site once where the guy was calling for the web prefix to be
    adopted as standard, personally i think it would be a good idea, to quote
    an old joke, is www the only acronym thats longer to say than the words it
    stands for.

    regards

    -- Max
     
    Max Barwell, May 11, 2004
    #8
  9. Collector

    cowboyz Guest

    Newsman wrote:

    >
    > If it's a .com address typing, say, dymo and hitting ctrl+Enter will
    > paste the full www.dymo.com address into the browser.



    That is interesting. Is there somewhere you can change the ctrl+enter to
    make it put .co.nz instead of .com? Very handy. Using IE6 BTW.
     
    cowboyz, May 11, 2004
    #9
  10. Collector

    Redbaiter Guest

    Jason M says
    > On Tue, 11 May 2004 09:22:00 GMT, (Newsman)
    > wrote:
    >
    > >If it's a .com address typing, say, dymo and hitting ctrl+Enter will
    > >paste the full www.dymo.com address into the browser.

    >
    > Use Mozilla and just type dymo Enter
    >
    >

    The creeps are always lurking.....


    --
    Redbaiter
    In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

    "The unforgivable crime is soft hitting. Do not hit at all if it
    can be avoided; but never hit softly." --Theodore Roosevelt
     
    Redbaiter, May 11, 2004
    #10
  11. Collector

    Andrew Guest

    Collector, when stopped by the local constabulary on 11/05/2004 8:49
    p.m., made the following statement:

    [snip]
    > Do we need the www anymore?


    Um - yes.

    Or not.

    --
    Andrew
    http://www.evil.geek.nz/
     
    Andrew, May 11, 2004
    #11
  12. Collector

    Dave Taylor Guest

    Max Barwell <maxb@*nospam*paradise.net.nz> wrote in
    news:pan.2004.05.11.09.44.48.720225@*nospam*paradise.net.nz:

    > Thats a bit of a strange one, on most modern browsers, if you just put in
    > example.com, it slings the www in for you, albeit behind the scenes, does
    > it not?


    www.xyz com is not the same as xyz.com
    Ask any web site building / registrar person. It take a little more work
    to do www AND no www to go to the same place in DNS.
    Ciao, Dave
     
    Dave Taylor, May 11, 2004
    #12
  13. cowboyz wrote:
    >
    > Newsman wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > If it's a .com address typing, say, dymo and hitting ctrl+Enter will
    > > paste the full www.dymo.com address into the browser.

    >
    > That is interesting. Is there somewhere you can change the ctrl+enter to
    > make it put .co.nz instead of .com? Very handy. Using IE6 BTW.


    Yep, to save you typing .com I recommend the following:

    - go to www.medumbshitmoron.com

    - download XTeq (just make sure you modify it - using the advanced
    options (not for novive users...i.e. the sort that can't type .com) -
    to search for .co.nz and then .com, or sumthin

    If that's not exactly what you want then I have a book to sell you
    with every possible permutation of what a user may want.

    And, remember: Linux is so much better because it takes smarter 'puter
    users to get it to do what they want. Hence, Microsoft OS's SUCK SHIT.

    Thank you.
     
    anti-msoft effwit, May 11, 2004
    #13
  14. Collector wrote:
    > Not the web itself but the prefix on domain names of www.
    >
    > Watching TV tonight and an add came on for a Dymo labeling machine, it
    > was PC connected and geeky enough to warrent a look since I had a
    > workstation in front of me I went to the site that they gave, verballly
    > called out as dymo.co.nz, page error, so I poked the www in front and
    > got the site!
    > Now the onscreen of the URL had the www.dymo.co.nz.
    >
    > When I put up a site I make sure both www.domain and domain resolve to
    > the correct pages, but so many others do not.
    >
    > Do we need the www anymore?
    >
    >

    Specifically we have never needed the www prefix to any web address. I
    think that it was originally put there to indicate that the (HTML) page
    that you where looking at was on the Internet and not on an intra net

    anyways how the system works is that each site has a specific IP address
    say 168.0.0.1 because this IP address doesn't mean anything to the
    average joe shmoe, they (the www consortium or somebodies) conceived of
    a system called DNS (domain naming server) these servers are allocated a
    certain number of IP addresses (example 168.0.1.0 to 168.0.100.0 would
    be equivalent to +/- 25500 IP individual addresses -- *I think*).

    Ok - somebody leases an IP address from X dns server owner and also asks
    for it to be bound to what ever name that they require (as long as that
    name has not been already used) the result of that binding is that when
    ever some one types in that www.abc.xyz address into their browser it
    will send a request to your ISP's server that will in turn search all
    the DNS servers for any matching that name when if finds the server that
    has a matching name that server resolves the www.abc.xyz into the
    relevant IP address (sorta like receiving mail in your letter box IP
    address 168.0.0.1 lives at the web name of www.abc.xyz).

    finally my point is that the www.abc.xyz can be replaced by what ever
    the server admins allow but they will be LOATH to change from what is
    already an accepted standard internationally.

    Cheers
    Murray

    PS standard prefixes
    www.abc.xyz - web pages
    ftp.abc.xyz - file transfer protocol
    gopher.abc.xyz - gopher was the pre www Internet some what like bulletin
    boards used to be
     
    Murray Sutherland, May 11, 2004
    #14
  15. Max Barwell wrote:
    >
    > On Tue, 11 May 2004 20:49:41 +1200, Collector wrote:
    >
    > > Not the web itself but the prefix on domain names of www.
    > >
    > > Watching TV tonight and an add came on for a Dymo labeling machine, it
    > > was PC connected and geeky enough to warrent a look since I had a
    > > workstation in front of me I went to the site that they gave, verballly
    > > called out as dymo.co.nz, page error, so I poked the www in front and
    > > got the site!
    > > Now the onscreen of the URL had the www.dymo.co.nz.
    > >
    > > When I put up a site I make sure both www.domain and domain resolve to
    > > the correct pages, but so many others do not.
    > >
    > > Do we need the www anymore?

    >
    > Thats a bit of a strange one, on most modern browsers, if you just put in
    > example.com, it slings the www in for you, albeit behind the scenes, does
    > it not?
    > But i have noticed that sometimes i have to manually make sure i put in
    > the www before a url will work, i guess its something to do with how they
    > have their dns setup.
    > On a related note, i have noticed url's in the form of web.example.com,
    > and saw a site once where the guy was calling for the web prefix to be
    > adopted as standard, personally i think it would be a good idea, to quote
    > an old joke, is www the only acronym thats longer to say than the words it
    > stands for.


    The amount of keypresses it took you to type that would allow
    1,000,000 Ethiopians to order food from a UNICEF one-click=one meal
    sites.

    Do you feel better now, retard?
     
    anti-msoft effwit, May 11, 2004
    #15
  16. Andrew wrote:
    >
    > Collector, when stopped by the local constabulary on 11/05/2004 8:49
    > p.m., made the following statement:
    >
    > [snip]
    > > Do we need the www anymore?

    >
    > Um - yes.
    >
    > Or not.


    The only intelligent thing said in this thread so far.
     
    anti-msoft effwit, May 11, 2004
    #16
  17. Collector wrote:
    > Not the web itself but the prefix on domain names of www.
    >
    > Watching TV tonight and an add came on for a Dymo labeling machine, it
    > was PC connected and geeky enough to warrent a look since I had a
    > workstation in front of me I went to the site that they gave, verballly
    > called out as dymo.co.nz, page error, so I poked the www in front and
    > got the site!
    > Now the onscreen of the URL had the www.dymo.co.nz.
    >
    > When I put up a site I make sure both www.domain and domain resolve to
    > the correct pages, but so many others do not.
    >
    > Do we need the www anymore?
    >
    >

    Specifically we have never needed the www prefix to any web address. I
    think that it was originally put there to indicate that the (HTML) page
    that you where looking at was on the Internet and not on an intra net

    anyways how the system works is that each site has a specific IP address
    say 168.0.0.1 because this IP address doesn't mean anything to the
    average joe shmoe, they (the www consortium or somebodies) conceived of
    a system called DNS (domain naming server) these servers are allocated a
    certain number of IP addresses (example 168.0.1.0 to 168.0.100.0 would
    be equivalent to +/- 25500 IP individual addresses -- *I think*).

    Ok - somebody leases an IP address from X dns server owner and also asks
    for it to be bound to what ever name that they require (as long as that
    name has not been already used) the result of that binding is that when
    ever some one types in that www.abc.xyz address into their browser it
    will send a request to your ISP's server that, will in turn search all
    the DNS servers for any matching name if finds the server that
    has a matching name, that server resolves the www.abc.xyz into the
    relevant IP address (sorta like receiving mail in your letter box IP
    address 168.0.0.1 lives at the web name of www.abc.xyz).

    finally my point is that the www.abc.xyz can be replaced by what ever
    the server admins allow but they will be LOATH to change from what is
    already an accepted standard internationally.

    Cheers
    Murray

    PS standard prefixes
    www.abc.xyz - web pages
    ftp.abc.xyz - file transfer protocol
    gopher.abc.xyz - gopher was the pre www Internet some what like bulletin
    boards used to be
     
    Murray Sutherland, May 11, 2004
    #17
  18. Murray Sutherland wrote:
    >
    > Collector wrote:
    > > Not the web itself but the prefix on domain names of www.
    > >
    > > Watching TV tonight and an add came on for a Dymo labeling machine, it
    > > was PC connected and geeky enough to warrent a look since I had a
    > > workstation in front of me I went to the site that they gave, verballly
    > > called out as dymo.co.nz, page error, so I poked the www in front and
    > > got the site!
    > > Now the onscreen of the URL had the www.dymo.co.nz.
    > >
    > > When I put up a site I make sure both www.domain and domain resolve to
    > > the correct pages, but so many others do not.
    > >
    > > Do we need the www anymore?
    > >
    > >

    > Specifically we have never needed the www prefix to any web address. I
    > think that it was originally put there to indicate that the (HTML) page
    > that you where looking at was on the Internet and not on an intra net
    >
    > anyways how the system works is that each site has a specific IP address
    > say 168.0.0.1 because this IP address doesn't mean anything to the
    > average joe shmoe, they (the www consortium or somebodies) conceived of
    > a system called DNS (domain naming server) these servers are allocated a
    > certain number of IP addresses (example 168.0.1.0 to 168.0.100.0 would
    > be equivalent to +/- 25500 IP individual addresses -- *I think*).
    >
    > Ok - somebody leases an IP address from X dns server owner and also asks
    > for it to be bound to what ever name that they require (as long as that
    > name has not been already used) the result of that binding is that when
    > ever some one types in that www.abc.xyz address into their browser it
    > will send a request to your ISP's server that, will in turn search all
    > the DNS servers for any matching name if finds the server that
    > has a matching name, that server resolves the www.abc.xyz into the
    > relevant IP address (sorta like receiving mail in your letter box IP
    > address 168.0.0.1 lives at the web name of www.abc.xyz).
    >
    > finally my point is that the www.abc.xyz can be replaced by what ever
    > the server admins allow but they will be LOATH to change from what is
    > already an accepted standard internationally.


    I don't doubt ANYTHING you say.........

    *But* isn't this shit just a little bit too complicated?

    I mean, can I reach hotdwarfsex.com by typing in hotdwarfsex.com or
    not?

    Why d'you people got to complicate everything????
     
    anti-msoft effwit, May 11, 2004
    #18
  19. Collector

    Collector Guest

    Dave Taylor wrote:

    >Max Barwell <maxb@*nospam*paradise.net.nz> wrote in
    >news:pan.2004.05.11.09.44.48.720225@*nospam*paradise.net.nz:
    >
    >
    >
    >>Thats a bit of a strange one, on most modern browsers, if you just put in
    >>example.com, it slings the www in for you, albeit behind the scenes, does
    >>it not?
    >>
    >>

    >
    >www.xyz com is not the same as xyz.com
    >Ask any web site building / registrar person. It take a little more work
    >to do www AND no www to go to the same place in DNS.
    >Ciao, Dave
    >
    >

    Not that much work it is just an alias. I use it all the time
     
    Collector, May 11, 2004
    #19
  20. Collector

    Collector Guest

    Murray Sutherland wrote:

    > Collector wrote:
    >
    >> Not the web itself but the prefix on domain names of www.
    >>
    >> Watching TV tonight and an add came on for a Dymo labeling machine,
    >> it was PC connected and geeky enough to warrent a look since I had a
    >> workstation in front of me I went to the site that they gave,
    >> verballly called out as dymo.co.nz, page error, so I poked the www in
    >> front and got the site!
    >> Now the onscreen of the URL had the www.dymo.co.nz.
    >>
    >> When I put up a site I make sure both www.domain and domain resolve
    >> to the correct pages, but so many others do not.
    >>
    >> Do we need the www anymore?
    >>
    >>

    > Specifically we have never needed the www prefix to any web address. I
    > think that it was originally put there to indicate that the (HTML)
    > page that you where looking at was on the Internet and not on an intra
    > net
    >
    > anyways how the system works is that each site has a specific IP
    > address say 168.0.0.1 because this IP address doesn't mean anything to
    > the average joe shmoe, they (the www consortium or somebodies)
    > conceived of a system called DNS (domain naming server) these servers
    > are allocated a certain number of IP addresses (example 168.0.1.0 to
    > 168.0.100.0 would be equivalent to +/- 25500 IP individual addresses
    > -- *I think*).
    >
    > Ok - somebody leases an IP address from X dns server owner and also
    > asks for it to be bound to what ever name that they require (as long
    > as that name has not been already used) the result of that binding is
    > that when ever some one types in that www.abc.xyz address into their
    > browser it will send a request to your ISP's server that will in turn
    > search all the DNS servers for any matching that name when if finds
    > the server that has a matching name that server resolves the
    > www.abc.xyz into the relevant IP address (sorta like receiving mail in
    > your letter box IP address 168.0.0.1 lives at the web name of
    > www.abc.xyz).
    >
    > finally my point is that the www.abc.xyz can be replaced by what ever
    > the server admins allow but they will be LOATH to change from what is
    > already an accepted standard internationally.
    >
    > Cheers
    > Murray
    >
    > PS standard prefixes
    > www.abc.xyz - web pages
    > ftp.abc.xyz - file transfer protocol
    > gopher.abc.xyz - gopher was the pre www Internet some what like
    > bulletin boards used to be


    Yep sort of like that, but www is still only an alias and ftp is as well
    except when ftp is used as a protocol eg ftp://

    Gopher was a structured arrangement like an index of web based documents
    a forrunner of google if you like.

    Now as to standards, nom admin yet has had a problem with making the
    aliases work for me, the www alias is resolved on the web server not in
    DNS, which actually ignores it .
     
    Collector, May 11, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Yepp

    Router redundant question

    Yepp, Oct 28, 2003, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    930
    Barry Margolin
    Nov 3, 2003
  2. D
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    4,427
    chris
    Nov 17, 2003
  3. info

    Redundant Connections

    info, Nov 21, 2003, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    484
  4. James
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    602
    Barry Margolin
    Dec 24, 2003
  5. Stuart Kendrick

    redundant switches / redundant server NICs

    Stuart Kendrick, Aug 9, 2004, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    4,531
    Stuart Kendrick
    Aug 10, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page