New tlds arriving '09?

[inertia]

I bet some of you have known about this for ages but I haven't seen any discussions on it so far:

Major internet shake-up heralds new web addresses | Technology | guardian.co.uk

What does everyone think about the ramifications of such a shake-up? Good or bad?

I think the world has taken .com into its heart and it is now so standardised (in the same way .co.uk is in the UK) that it is part of our daily vocabulary ("why dont you go and log on to shut the hell up .com!?"). Will a load of new TLDs just mean more for joe public to remember? Would it make no sense to create new ones when we have enough already?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by inertia

What does everyone think about the ramifications of such a shake-up? Good or bad?

To be honest I read this a few days ago and I felt sick. I can only see more parked domains, and incompetent for business scammers trying to hurt established companies using their existing domain names with suffixes such as .bank, .sport, .bet, etc.

This is not utopia or paranoia. It is an evidence based fact! To be specific:

I have been trapped in an over-heated debate with a member here at WPW (no names), and I got a threat PM telling me within others:

"Check out the new site I just bought, oh wait it is the same name as your site but .info, wonder how that happened."

Thats all what I can tell bro.

[inertia]

Basically, to protect ourselves from attack we are all going to have to register truck loads of domain names.

Domain name salesman are still using this tactic today. They scare the c*ap out of naive business owners and make them buy every possible variation on their company domain.

(hope your "cyber beef" resolves itself soon WNTS!)

[Webnauts]

Don't be afraid man. Those tactics are garbage if you do a good work and your site is once established. The ones who will suffer are unexperienced site owners and new web comers.

[inertia]

The ones who will suffer are unexperienced site owners and new web comers.

Theyre the ones who always suffer and as long as people like that exist certain companies will carry on making loads of money! I know companies who have a "if theyre stupid enough to pay then were clever enough to ask" philosophy.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by inertia

I know companies who have a "if theyre stupid enough to pay then were clever enough to ask" philosophy.

Do you want stupid customers? They can be a serious pain in the ass.

[inertia]

No! I hate stupid customers! The current company im working for deal with larger companies who are serious about their web marketing but i have worked for other companies who target the stupid customers.

The only thing worse than a stupid customer is a stupid salesman whose sold something that you really cant provide!

[incrediblehelp]

It is going to be a complete mess.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

It is going to be a complete mess.

You can bet on that bro.

[bj]

Yeah, pretty much a complete spammer haven. Now all the sysadmins will have to block every new tld like they now block .info and .mobi and the others that everyone thought was a "gold rush".

[chrisJumbo]

I just don't understand their rationale. With the TLDs already out there, it has been a pain, this will just make it much, much worse. I'm sure the domain sellers/sitters are thrilled, though.

[advancedmerchant]

With a $100K registration fee, and the REQUIREMENT TO MANAGE it, I don't expect many problems. Major corporations can have .pepsi, .HP, .Dell, etc.

It's real simple, if they require the TLD's to have 4 or more characters, we can filter them ALL out, and have "INCLUSION LISTS", instead of filters and exclusion lists that grow beyond managable size. You could tell your system to reject any 4 or more character TLD except (maybe) .info, .mobi, and .microsoft.

Someone will almost certainly 'sponsor' .sex, .xxx, .adult, etc, they will be easy to filter (I think), as they will make the news as someone forks over the $$$ to sponsor the TLD.

Remember, this is not a free-for-all, this is an expensive club. Once, as an example, Microsoft sponsors .Microsoft, they just will not allow anyone except themselves, and maybe certified partners to use the TLD.

This could be something positive, eBayer's could register their site under .ebay to go straight to their eBay store using their existing URL prefix. You could access your Amazon.com account under yourname.amazon,

[alexsimon]

I am mainly a domainer, and I am not thrilled. .com will remain .com even if .shit arrives. And this will be a big pain for big TM holders who will have to register their domains because of the cybersquatters.

Anyway, on short term nothing may happen. On long term yes, as I think ebay will buy .ebay, so that they can fight easier all those phishing sites. They supported this new move.

Other than that it is just money for ICANN & co.

[bj]

Other than that it is just money for ICANN & co.

Yeah, ICANN & Co, and all the domain registrars, and all the frontrunners, and all the squatters, and all the spammers and all the other greedy basta*ds.

[Big Juice]

This is a bad idea that will devalue the Internet as we know it. Another thing to think about is how the search engines will address the new TLDs? Will we be looking at domain age becoming an even bigger factor for rankings?

As a person who works on the dark side of the Internet you know I am going after .666 and would love to be able to control that TLD.

As someone who works in gambling I would have to say it would very easy for some gambling company that is flush with money to corner the market by securing .bet .gamble. .wager .poker .casino - can you say monopoly?

I worked in porn too and there is another industry flush with cash - how would you like to control .boob .tits .ass .kiss .babes .cum .et el? I know I would love to control all of the .boobs on the Internet!

ICANN you say cash grab?

[advancedmerchant]

[QUOTE=Big Juice;383875]This is a bad idea that will devalue the Internet as we know it. Another thing to think about is how the search engines will address the new TLDs? Will we be looking at domain age becoming an even bigger factor for rankings? /QUOTE]

WOW! Domain age = Rankings?? I would be ALL FOR THAT! If they gave precedence to the oldest holder of content, then content theft would be a thing of the past....

[deepsand]

This is a train wreck, of monumental proportions, waiting to happen

I can't wait to see how many go after DNs such as "abcdef.ebay."

The sh!ts gonna hit the fan.

[DaveSawers]

Why so negative? What's the big deal with TLDs anyway. I bet 90% or more of internet users don't know (and don't care) what .com is supposed to mean. So someone registers microsoft.stinks Who cares. It will soon become obvious that the official microsoft site is called microsoft (with no dots at all). Let's get rid of all TLD's, and all dots in domain names and let's allow the use of spaces so you can actually read what the domain name is supposed to be. This proposal is a start but it could have gone a lot further in my view.

Sure the new system will need some regulation and there's bound to be a few law suits but in the end, I think it'll be much better for internet users.

[datetopia]

this.looks-like-chaos ... what's next? domains with unicode letters? or at least punctuation.... in 10 years we could register "Hello! This is my domain name... Please click! ... Sir!".

[Peter (IMC)]

Why so afraid? Why so emotional?

Just the other day I was almost the victim of one of those lousy fraude emails that create a adwords.google.com.something.cn domain and made an almost perfect copy of the Google Adwords interface. They sent an email that looked just like a usual adwords email saying that they couldn't process the last payment. I already had my credit card in my hand when I realized that just a couple of hours before I had seen one of our ads in a Google SERP. Then I noticed the damn URL was wrong.

The spammers and other criminals don't need all those new TLD's to do their lousy thing. Is it going to get worse? Is that even possible? It's already very very bad. It can't get any worse than it already is.

These aditional TLD's won't change a thing.

What's needed is a way to catch spammers and make them be acountable for what they´re doing. I realize that's almost an impossible thing to do, though there are things that help.

Paypal for example makes a huge point out of being careful in every email they send. Don't click on links in emails. Google could do something like that too.

Buying all those aditional TLD's to "protect" your website is just fake security if you ask me. Just to fool your self.

Maybe they should change something and make it possible to simply register the word before the last dot. (in some countries before the last 2 dots like thisword.co.uk) and automatically you reserved all the other combination in case you use an officially registered name. That would take care of a lot of these problems.

[Peter (IMC)]

[quote=advancedmerchant;383877]

Originally Posted by Big Juice

This is a bad idea that will devalue the Internet as we know it. Another thing to think about is how the search engines will address the new TLDs? Will we be looking at domain age becoming an even bigger factor for rankings? /QUOTE]

WOW! Domain age = Rankings?? I would be ALL FOR THAT! If they gave precedence to the oldest holder of content, then content theft would be a thing of the past....

It already is a factor,.

[subsystems]

I don't think it will be such a big deal for companies like EBay.

Lets say EBay buys the .ebay TLD. They then control all sites under that TLD. How would someone else register abcdef.ebay if EBay controls it? *.ebay will be totally EBay and NO squatters, spammers etc.

I can see a problem with TLDs that are registrars who then sell domains under their TLD.

I can tell you what. The company that purchases .spam will never get any business.

Why would .pepsi, .ford, .google, or .respectablecompany create any kind of trouble? I can see .hostingprovider or .webmall being more of a problem

Should be easy to block .porn .spam .sex and any .keywordlist. Blocking TLDs longer than 3 will cause some trouble as more respectable sites begin to use them.

It sure would make identifying places like .linkfarm easier to filter. I would think that since the TLDs are so much more costly that owners will take better care of how the domains under them are used. Yahoo isn't going to want .yahoo filtered simply because some "yahoo" decided to make an unwantedcontent1.yahoo unwantedcontent2.yahoo farm.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by DaveSawers

Sure the new system will need some regulation and there's bound to be a few law suits but in the end, I think it'll be much better for internet users.

Only a few?

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by subsystems

I don't think it will be such a big deal for companies like EBay.

Lets say EBay buys the .ebay TLD. They then control all sites under that TLD. How would someone else register abcdef.ebay if EBay controls it? *.ebay will be totally EBay and NO squatters, spammers etc.

I can see a problem with TLDs that are registrars who then sell domains under their TLD.

I can tell you what. The company that purchases .spam will never get any business.

Why would .pepsi, .ford, .google, or .respectablecompany create any kind of trouble? I can see .hostingprovider or .webmall being more of a problem

Should be easy to block .porn .spam .sex and any .keywordlist. Blocking TLDs longer than 3 will cause some trouble as more respectable sites begin to use them.

It sure would make identifying places like .linkfarm easier to filter. I would think that since the TLDs are so much more costly that owners will take better care of how the domains under them are used. Yahoo isn't going to want .yahoo filtered simply because some "yahoo" decided to make an unwantedcontent1.yahoo unwantedcontent2.yahoo farm.

Just like no one can buy an entire TLD today, so too for the future.

eBay, for example, will own only own those specific Domain Names that they register under the "ebay" TLD.

[subsystems]

Speaking of .com being part of the lexicon. When I am in public if I accidentally burp or break wind, rather than saying excuse me, I just say dot com afterwords. Usually gets a laugh. Then I say excuse me after the laughter calms down.

If someone else burps or breaks wind I just say "I tried to Google that, but it just came back with 'Did you mean BURP?'"

The best is one that gets employees ROTFLOL is instead use the name of a competitor's business. As in "I tried to Google that, but it just came back with 'Did you mean Ted's Electric?'" You'd be surprised how many times you will hear that repeated while you are still there. LOL

[incrediblehelp]

As long as the search engine give NO preference on these TLDs then it could be OK, but you know that they very well could which would make the owners of these TLDs have a unfair competitive advantage in search.

[MattE]

or another take
Huge shake-up planned for internet

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by MattE

or another take
Huge shake-up planned for internet

Hm-mm.

Nothing there but a week-old post re. ICANNS's upcoming vote.

[subsystems]

Originally Posted by deepsand

Just like no one can buy an entire TLD today, so too for the future.

eBay, for example, will own only own those specific Domain Names that they register under the "ebay" TLD.

How do you figure? If I purchase .mycompany, don't I have complete control over the domains under that TLD?

It would be totally worthless once the .pepsi TLD is purchased to have it open season on .pepsi domains. I can just see it now, coke.pepsi and pepsi.coke.

Surely they can't have made such a stupid blunder like that?

Assuming I am correct, I would think the trickier part for companies would be to get the .TLD into the root servers. Aren't most of those manually added at this point? Isn't there going to be a problem with registrars? Lets say I want to purchase .mycompany TLD. Who would I then go to to register domains under my TLD? Registrars don't currently have the ability to register TLDs. So I have registered the TLD with someone. They would then surely have to be my registrar as well so I can register sales.mycompany or uk.mycompany or anything.mycompany. Would I then have to pay the registration fee for each of my domains? Currently it is common practice for hostname.domain.mycompany the hostname part is simply controlled by the DNS server settings and no additional purchases are required. Will the domain.mycompany domain simply be defined at the registrar without any additional cost?

Imagine looking at the DNS server configuration list. Egads!
I can see another problem brewing with the root servers. Right now the .tld traffic is distributed widely between numerous root servers. If say .pepsi isn't distributed in the same manner that the other TLDs are now there could be some serious loading problems in some areas. Lets say .aol is rooted near their proxy gateway, the load that was spread all over the root servers will now be in one area.

A helpful article is on Wikipedia.
Root nameserver - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is just a little out of my league but I can see some serious problems coming in getting traffic balanced again.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

Why so afraid? Why so emotional?

Just the other day I was almost the victim of one of those lousy fraude emails that create a adwords.google.com.something.cn domain and made an almost perfect copy of the Google Adwords interface. They sent an email that looked just like a usual adwords email saying that they couldn't process the last payment. I already had my credit card in my hand when I realized that just a couple of hours before I had seen one of our ads in a Google SERP. Then I noticed the damn URL was wrong.

They almost got me with that one as well.

[Palindrome]

As many people have pointed out, ICANN seem to have displayed the level of naivety normally reserved for politicians, unless those influencing them saw the future.

Incredible Help has come to the point we should all be concerned about, the effect on search. Search engines have no choice but to give consumers what they believe they want, to sustain their own business model. Once these TLDs take hold, major companies will dominate search even more than they do now.

The cost of acquiring the domains and the armoury to develop them may well lead to a situation where with many searches, those locked out will have little hope. Ensuring that the web did not go the way of so many other advances, be bought up and consolidated, should have been a priority for everyone, including governments. Stifling growing enterprise eventually leads to decay. I can not help but think that ICANN's decision takes us down that road.

[SEO]

Get ready for another .com boom.
This looks like it could be another opportunity for "Average Joe" to become an overnight multimillionaire just by having a little insightful forethought.
You can rest assured the 'big boys' are already rubbing their hands together in anticipation...

[xtempore]

Who is this change supposed to benefit???

I cannot see any benefit for the viewing public. To me the average joe already seems confused enough by any domain name outside the ordinary. I'm curious to know the experience of others, but for my part if your domain is not really, really obvious then you end up having to explain over and over, "no, it's mydomain.biz", and even then they still go to "mydomain.com" instead, so what was the point?

I cannot see any benefit for genuine business. Some of them seem to think it will solve all their problems, but how does having .ebay really help. Everyone already knows to go to ebay.com anyway. It just seems like this will cost businesses more money to maintain their existing web identity, and more effort to combat the phishing sites. The only businesses that will flourish are the phishers and the registrars.

From the posts here so far it seems typical webmasters are generally against the idea. Part of this no doubt is that the domain soup will cause them some problems. Probably more than anything though, they recognise that they are going to be the ones who are stuck in the middle of this mess trying to keep their sanity while their clients all go nuts trying to make sense of this change.

I apologise for being so cynical, but it seems to me that ICANN like so many bureaucracies before them are simply creating "busy-work" to justify their own existence.

Somehow they came to the unanimous decision that this was a good idea. What sort of bubble are these people living in? Let's face it who is better placed to judge this than the folks who create the interface between the business and the public (i.e. webmasters)? And yet despite a broad rejection of the idea here, THEY still came to the conclusion that this was a good idea.

Probably the only saving grace in all this is that the public won't want to learn a bunch of new TLDs anyway and will continue to just try .com on the end of the domain anyway.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by subsystems

How do you figure? If I purchase .mycompany, don't I have complete control over the domains under that TLD?

Nope; that's not the way it works. Of course, it could be made to work that way, but that remains to be seen.

[xtempore]

My impression of responses is that most respondents are against this idea, but maybe I'm projecting, so I created a POLL to ask the question.

Your say - ICANN's new gTLDs

Please follow the link and then cast your vote.

Your say - ICANN's new gTLDs

If there are strong feelings against this it may be worth attempting to rally some resistance to it, and to present these concerns and opinions to ICANN. I'm sure some will be skeptical about the chances of changing anything, but surely it's better to at least try than simply moaning about it after it's all too late.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by subsystems

... I would think the trickier part for companies would be to get the .TLD into the root servers. Aren't most of those manually added at this point? Isn't there going to be a problem with registrars? Lets say I want to purchase .mycompany TLD. Who would I then go to to register domains under my TLD? Registrars don't currently have the ability to register TLDs. So I have registered the TLD with someone. They would then surely have to be my registrar as well so I can register sales.mycompany or uk.mycompany or anything.mycompany. Would I then have to pay the registration fee for each of my domains? Currently it is common practice for hostname.domain.mycompany the hostname part is simply controlled by the DNS server settings and no additional purchases are required. Will the domain.mycompany domain simply be defined at the registrar without any additional cost?

Imagine looking at the DNS server configuration list. Egads!
I can see another problem brewing with the root servers. Right now the .tld traffic is distributed widely between numerous root servers. If say .pepsi isn't distributed in the same manner that the other TLDs are now there could be some serious loading problems in some areas. Lets say .aol is rooted near their proxy gateway, the load that was spread all over the root servers will now be in one area.

There's no problem here at all.

Very simply, were you to be able to control an entire TLD, it would be your responsibility to 1) acquire and manage the necessary IP Addresses; 2) provide Registration services for all Domains within that TLD; 3) assign IP Addresses to those Domain Names and 4) maintain the Authoritative Name Servers for that TLD. In short, all the work would be yours! Or, you can pay someone else to do it for you.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by xtempore

Who is this change supposed to benefit???

There is no benefit for anyone. The big companies are forced to spend the money to buy the extension and upkeep it.

No spammer is going to spend $100,000.00 to buy an extension to use for spamming. And the general public is not going to type coke.coke to go to Coke's website.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by janeth

There is no benefit for anyone. The big companies are forced to spend the money to buy the extension and upkeep it.

No spammer is going to spend $100,000.00 to buy an extension to use for spamming. And the general public is not going to type coke.coke to go to Coke's website.

IMHO, they would if coke.coke led to a coke dealer's site!

[deepsand]

This CNET reports contains a few more details.

ICANN adopts new Web site naming rules | Tech news blog - CNET News.com

[Deeho]

But they won't use coke.coke, they will use buy.coke instead. It is my understanding that by spending 100,000 grand you will have exclusive rights to the name and all domains for it. This opens up a lot of possiblities, all of them expensive. If you were to get hold of .hosting and within say five years these domaind were given a significant Algorithm advantage within the major engines, devaluing .com, .co.uk etc then what will all of the hosting companies do? Pay the man the money.... some people ar going to get very rich out of this "Tidying" up process.

Dave Holland CEO of <a href=http://www.deeho.co.uk">Search Engine Optimization</a> "The view from the top is better"

[SEO]

Originally Posted by xtempore

Who is this change supposed to benefit???

Let's pretend for a moment that my name is Rupert Murdoch.
I pay a measly $250,000 for .realestate
I then set up subdomains for every city in the USA and lease them for $X,000 - $X0,000 per year.
.realestate becomes a mega real estate authority site (and pulls up the subdomains in the rankings with it).
How much is a ready made authority subdomain for Texas real estate worth per year to lease?

Or as in the original article posted for this topic. The Mayor of NYC is already rubbing his hands together. His options would be pretty much unlimited. kosherbakery.nyc, carinsurance.nyc, realestate.nyc, homeequitylineofcredit.nyc, anything-you-want-to-type-into-the-search-engines-to-do-with-nyc.nyc ... What do you think the New York City authority site will be as far as the search engines are concerned...? How much do you think New York City businesses would be willing to pay for an authority subdomain name like that...?

Obviously Google will be incorporating these new domains into it's algorithms as automatic authority sites.

Those with the money are the ones who will benefit...

All the price tag of $X00,000.00 does is rule out the working class.
To the wealthy 'Elite' of this world that's the price of a hotel room for a few nights.

[xtempore]

Some of the articles also mention other cities would probably get to have their own TLDs.

One such city they mention is London - by which they no doubt mean London, UK. But where does that leave the folks of London, Ontario?

Or what about Sydney - will that be the Australian one or the one in Nova Scotia?

Paris? French or Texan?

How about Toronto? Probably the Canadian one and not the small town on the Australian NSW Central coast.

When the Anglos set out across the world they took their language and their place names with them... London, Picton, Blenheim, Nelson - you'll find a lot of these same-name places spread across the English speaking post-colonial world, from Australia to Zimbabwe.

Did the folks at ICANN stop to think about that? (Actually let me shorten that sentence by two words)

It makes me laugh to think that they blocked ".xxx" on the "grounds of morality". Do they think there is no porn on the net? (Avenue Q tells us otherwise) Wouldn't it make the job of filtering out these sites so much easier if they all complied and used the ".xxx" domain?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by deepsand

IMHO, they would if coke.coke led to a coke dealer's site!

The reason I said big companies would be forced to purchase the names.

And the cops would own the last one before the month was out, right after they arrested the stupid coke dealer.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by SEO

the price of a hotel

Another good one. Hotel. (:

[kgun]

Originally Posted by inertia

I bet some of you have known about this for ages but I haven't seen any discussions on it so far:

Major internet shake-up heralds new web addresses | Technology | guardian.co.uk

What does everyone think about the ramifications of such a shake-up? Good or bad?

Cite from that article:

"The decision means that as well as millions of existing website addresses which end in .com or .co.uk, surfers will also be able to choose from sites with suffixes such as .bank, .sport or .bet."


My own view:

1. Open mind.
2. How successfull has .biz and .eu been?

Concequences for search:

If you "google"

business.com

this Business.com - The Business Search Engine® and Business Directory for Business Information is as it should be, the first hit.

If you "google"

business.*

this ArabianBusiness.com - Middle East Business, Financial & Industry News, Events & Information is the first hit and more relevant than one of the worlds most important portals.

I have always missed a good search for

domain.* OR domain.*.* OR domain.*.*.*


and

1. Alphabetical ordering of the results.
2. Page Rank ordering of the results like in the Google directory where Business.com - The Business Search Engine® and Business Directory for Business Information is the first hit for
   
   business.*

Originally Posted by xtempore

It makes me laugh to think that they blocked ".xxx" on the "grounds of morality". Do they think there is no porn on the net? (Avenue Q tells us otherwise) Wouldn't it make the job of filtering out these sites so much easier if they all complied and used the ".xxx" domain?

Agree. It would make life much easier if all adult related sites were moved to .xxx as once proposed. Is it possible in practice? Would that imply that all .com sites with adult material were exluded from the search engine's register? I suppose no, too much money are involved.


Personal wish:

Scam sites --> .scam

Bad redirect sites ---> .badredirect

Bad pop ups ---> .badpopup

Hacker sites ---> .hacker

Spam sites ---> .spam

Virus infected sites ----> .virus

etc. etc.


<side note>

1. What is a perfect world?
2. What is a perfect human being?
3. Who has never made a sin?
4. Who has never looked at other peoples code and "stole"? (Kw's Mac Os and Lotus spreadsheet).
5. Who has never looked at ...

Norwegian saying: "The cow forgets that she once was a calf".
</side note>

[inertia]

Does anyone think that we should be making things simpler, not more complicated? The man on the street doesnt want to have to remember more than .com (or his standard country equivalent).

[kgun]

What about .edu .org and .net?

Einstein once said: "Make it simple, as simple as possible, but no simpler."

The problem is that that may be fairly complex. K.W search

limitation "url addresses" 21 000 hits

Related: Limitations of web servers

[inertia]

There you go! Its already too complicated for a lot of people. I bet 99% of the UK know .com and .co.uk. Ask them what .info or .edu is and they wouldnt have a clue. With the infinite possibilities of these new domains it means that they have something extra to remember in place of the standard .com or .co.uk.

Whats going to be easier to market to the masses - nychotel.com or hotel.nyc? Maybe after time people will adjust but i dont see the marketing potential at all.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by deepsand

Hm-mm.

Nothing there but a week-old post re. ICANNS's upcoming vote.

There is a link to this BBC NEWS | Technology | 'Shake-up' for internet proposed recent BBC post.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by inertia

Whats going to be easier to market to the masses - nychotel.com or hotel.nyc? Maybe after time people will adjust but i dont see the marketing potential at all.

It is about

• KW's,
• semantics (meaning)
• relations,
• structure
• thinking outside the box,
• Lateral thinking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world. Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)"

Originally Posted by subsystems

How do you figure? If I purchase .mycompany, don't I have complete control over the domains under that TLD?

May be it should be reserved for you so you can easily make your own extranet or is that too restrictive?