"Large Horse" is silly fun with subdomains

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2024/07/10/large-horse-is-silly-fun-with-subdomains.html

3 Likes

There are limits :smiley:

We can’t connect to the server at very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.very.large.horse.

6 Likes

Neighsayers!

21 Likes

Kinda annoying to have to click on the “Continue to HTTP Site” every single time because it’s not https, since I have the https only mode enabled.

5 Likes

I’m more upset than I should be that hitting the “-” button from the start doesn’t take you to small.horse.

ETA: Apparently that domain is taken up by an MLP image… Such a waste.

EATA: Tiny.horse isn’t taken, though! Someone let the creator know!

EOATA: Little.horse doesn’t seem to be for sale, but maybe if you’ve got a lot of disposable income…

4 Likes

femto.horse

2 Likes

You mean someone’s going to have to pony up for it?
You need to nag them until they do.

10 Likes

This is more nerdy but has been around for a while.

$ traceroute -m 50 bad.horse
. . .
22  bad.horse (162.252.205.130)  83.591 ms  83.657 ms  83.278 ms
23  bad.horse (162.252.205.131)  81.632 ms  81.602 ms  87.411 ms
24  bad.horse (162.252.205.132)  87.423 ms  84.988 ms  93.429 ms
25  bad.horse (162.252.205.133)  97.077 ms  89.453 ms  97.036 ms
26  he.rides.across.the.nation (162.252.205.134)  97.027 ms  102.130 ms  102.101 ms
27  the.thoroughbred.of.sin (162.252.205.135)  102.154 ms  108.439 ms  108.413 ms
28  he.got.the.application (162.252.205.136)  113.343 ms  113.318 ms  104.443 ms
29  that.you.just.sent.in (162.252.205.137)  110.211 ms  118.777 ms  109.453 ms
30  it.needs.evaluation (162.252.205.138)  114.548 ms  114.519 ms  121.066 ms
31  so.let.the.games.begin (162.252.205.139)  128.375 ms  121.127 ms  122.017 ms
32  a.heinous.crime (162.252.205.140)  131.966 ms  127.031 ms  126.998 ms
33  a.show.of.force (162.252.205.141)  130.043 ms  129.831 ms  137.601 ms
34  a.murder.would.be.nice.of.course (162.252.205.142)  134.482 ms  141.417 ms  140.961 ms
35  bad.horse (162.252.205.143)  140.975 ms  140.917 ms  148.432 ms
36  bad.horse (162.252.205.144)  151.835 ms  147.159 ms  152.343 ms
37  bad.horse (162.252.205.145)  152.361 ms  152.207 ms  151.917 ms
38  he-s.bad (162.252.205.146)  156.090 ms  163.152 ms  161.913 ms
39  the.evil.league.of.evil (162.252.205.147)  162.196 ms  168.365 ms  168.349 ms
40  is.watching.so.beware (162.252.205.148)  167.346 ms  172.288 ms  167.007 ms
41  the.grade.that.you.receive (162.252.205.149)  178.131 ms  172.197 ms  177.625 ms
42  will.be.your.last.we.swear (162.252.205.150)  181.019 ms  183.439 ms  182.044 ms
43  so.make.the.bad.horse.gleeful (162.252.205.151)  182.086 ms  182.061 ms  182.022 ms
44  or.he-ll.make.you.his.mare (162.252.205.152)  191.474 ms  191.442 ms  187.042 ms
45  o_o (162.252.205.153)  191.480 ms  191.414 ms  191.402 ms
46  you-re.saddled.up (162.252.205.154)  197.371 ms  203.281 ms  197.333 ms
47  there-s.no.recourse (162.252.205.155)  208.704 ms  208.660 ms  208.624 ms
48  it-s.hi-ho.silver (162.252.205.156)  207.007 ms  204.515 ms  213.450 ms
49  signed.bad.horse (162.252.205.157)  213.271 ms  207.305 ms  213.367 ms

If you don’t have access to a command-line version of traceroute, you can also look at it with this web doodad:

Enter “-m 50 bad.horse” into the box. It defaults to 30 hops which cuts the output short, but to my surprise apparently it just appends the input to a “traceroute” command line so you can use the standard option to set the maximum hop count.

14 Likes

A one trick pony.

7 Likes

I like the part where the horse got bigger.

4 Likes

And some nerdery about that limit - that domain name has just a smidge over the 255 bytes that is the maximum (and you need at least a null byte at the end as well - IIRC the longest domain name is 253 bytes but I can’t remember why, potentially the implied “.” for the root as well?).

4 Likes

That comes from RFC1034, chapter 3.1, last but one paragraph:

To simplify implementations, the total number of octets that represent a domain name (i.e., the sum of all label octets and label lengths) is limited to 255.

Since a domain name (including TLDs) for DNS records includes at least one label (length+content) and a zero length label as end marker, we have the 253 character limit.
Dots are not included, they are just label separators for human convenience.

4 Likes

Well, now I have the song stuck in my head

2 Likes

Thank you very much - I thoroughly appreciate the RFC pointer! My brain can now relax :slight_smile:

2 Likes

But you can count all the characters, including dots, in the human-readable form of the domain name with a trailing dot and it will have the same number of octets as the binary form of the domain name used in DNS request/reply records, since each label length is encoded as a single octet preceding the label characters, with the maximum length of a label being 63 octets.

(edited to add: unless you are looking at a domain name containing Unicode characters encoded in labels which is an extension to the original DNS standard.)

That way the count will be missing one octet: the name is always terminated by a zero-length label, represented by just its length octet, set to zero.

Yes, multioctet character encoding complicates the matter further…

Well, you know what they say, the two hardest things in computer science is counting.

3 Likes

Why not replace it with another?

Because as soon as I saw large.horse , I immediately checked to see if someone had registered my.lovely.horse. And yes, they have.

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.