_for-sale DNS records

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

A new DNS standard that lets domain owners publicly mark domains as “for sale” via a special `_for-sale` record is drawing mixed reactions. Supporters see it as a simple, machine-readable way to signal sale intent without relying on WHOIS or parked pages, while critics argue it mainly entrenches domain squatting, financializes the namespace further, and adds little beyond existing mechanisms. The conversation also touches on legal and policy angles around trademarks, dispute resolution, and proposals like taxing high-value holdings to discourage large speculative portfolios.

Perception of the spec and site

  • Several commenters see the spec site as AI-generated “slop” and question its legitimacy as a standards venue.
  • Others push back, noting it’s based on an actual RFC (linked) and has prior art (e.g., .nl registry doing something similar), but skepticism about AI-written standards content is strong.

Intended purpose of _for-sale DNS record

  • Record lets domain owners advertise that a domain is for sale, with optional metadata like price or contact URL, discoverable via DNS instead of WHOIS or landing pages.
  • Meant to address privacy-redacted WHOIS and spammy cold-email dynamics.

Perceived benefits

  • Some domain owners would like a low-friction, machine-readable way to signal they’re open to offers, especially for legitimate transfers (e.g., to a museum or organization) without using parking pages.
  • Seen by a few as “better than nothing” compared with the current ad-hoc TXT records and parked pages.

Critiques & squatting concerns

  • Many argue this mainly helps domain squatters and financializes domains further, making life harder for people trying to get reasonable names.
  • Some suggest seized/“use it or lose it” or tax-based regimes (Harberger/Georgist ideas, vacancy-style taxes) to disincentivize hoarding.
  • Others counter that “squatting” is hard to define and that owning unused domains is analogous to other assets; intent and use are nuanced.

Legal & policy angles

  • Discussion of trademarks, UDRP, and domain disputes:
    • Publicly listing a domain for sale is not automatically bad faith under UDRP; panels look at context (distinctiveness of mark, timing, purpose, pricing).
    • Being willing to sell is common; legal risk depends on targeting trademark owners and overall pattern of behavior.

Technical design debates

  • Some criticize using TXT instead of a new RR type and the loose, non-binding semantics (“just an advertisement”).
  • Underscore-prefixed labels are discussed as a de facto reserved namespace; concerns about subdomain services accidentally exposing _for-sale.
  • Scope at any DNS level vs apex-only is questioned for potential confusion.

Broader DNS/system frustrations

  • Complaints about domain names as “real estate,” caps on ownership, registrar premium pricing, and user confusion around newer TLDs.
  • Some think nobody needed this spec; others see it as a minor, incremental improvement in discovery.