Forgot your password?

typodupeerror
Google The Internet Technology

Google Mystery Domain Reroutes 3% of Net Surfers 140

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the 3%-of-a-lot-is-still-a-lot dept.
An anonymous reader writes "A new Google domain — 1e100.net, a nod to the company's famously misspelled name — is now the net's 44th most visited site. Google says the domain is used to 'identify servers' on its internal network, hinting that reverse DNS plays a role. The domain was registered in September and launched in October, about the same time Google unveiled Spanner, a new addition to its backend infrastructure designed to shift loads automatically among its data centers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Mystery Domain Reroutes 3% of Net Surfers

Comments Filter:
  • 1e400 or? (Score:3, Informative)

    by tehniobium (1042240) <lukeNO@SPAMniodesign.com> on Monday February 08 2010, @09:55AM (#31060020) Homepage
    TFA says 1e100 as in...a gogol.
  • Re:1e400.net? (Score:5, Informative)

    by eihab (823648) * on Monday February 08 2010, @09:56AM (#31060042)

    Wrong summary. I emailed the editors a minute too late I guess.

    The domain is 1e100.net:

    Domain Name: 1E100.NET
          Registrar: MARKMONITOR INC.
          Whois Server: whois.markmonitor.com
          Referral URL: http://www.markmonitor.com/ [markmonitor.com]
          Name Server: NS1.GOOGLE.COM
          Name Server: NS2.GOOGLE.COM
          Name Server: NS3.GOOGLE.COM
          Name Server: NS4.GOOGLE.COM
          Status: clientDeleteProhibited
          Status: clientRenewProhibited
          Status: clientTransferProhibited
          Status: clientUpdateProhibited
          Status: serverDeleteProhibited
          Status: serverRenewProhibited
          Status: serverTransferProhibited
          Status: serverUpdateProhibited
          Updated Date: 13-oct-2009
          Creation Date: 25-sep-2009
          Expiration Date: 25-sep-2019

  • by FlyingBishop (1293238) on Monday February 08 2010, @10:02AM (#31060112)

    You realize that it's just infrastructure, right? You might as well block images.google.com for all the good it will do you. It's just a domain name.

  • Re:wtf? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Spad (470073) <slashdotNO@SPAMspad.co.uk> on Monday February 08 2010, @10:09AM (#31060150) Homepage

    It's supposed to be 1e100.net, i.e. 1x10^100 or a Googol.

  • Re:1e400.net? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 08 2010, @10:12AM (#31060176)

    Some thoughts about the domain name itself. Google probably wanted to use 10e100, since that character string means 10 to the 100 power - in other words, a googol. Not sure why they settled for 1e100, because that only comes out to a measly 1.

    You're wrong. 1e100 is 1 * 10^100

    "e" is not the same as "^"

  • Re:1e400.net? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Jimmy_B (129296) <(gro.hmodnarmij) (ta) (todhsals)> on Monday February 08 2010, @10:16AM (#31060212) Homepage
    XeY means X*10^Y, not X^Y.
  • Re:1e400 or? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 08 2010, @10:19AM (#31060230)

    Have you really never seen 'e' notation before? This is the second time you have posted this nonsense.

    1e100 is standard programming-speak for 1*10^100, which is a google.

    In a number context, 'e' is not the power operator. ('^' means power.) 'e' means, 'times 10 to the power of'. So XeY, when X and Y are strings of digits, means X*10^Y

  • Re:1e400.net? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Bromskloss (750445) <auxiliary...addr ... vacy@@@gmail.com> on Monday February 08 2010, @10:20AM (#31060234)

    1e100 is the same as 1^100, which is a Googol, or if you're a google founder, spelled "Google"

    I hope that was a typo.

    • 1e100 = 1E100 = 10^100 = a googol
    • 1^100 = 1
  • Re:1e400 or? (Score:3, Informative)

    by wisnoskij (1206448) on Monday February 08 2010, @10:23AM (#31060274)
    1e1 = 1*10^1 = 10 [wolframalpha.com]
    1e10 = 1*10^10 = 10000000000 [wolframalpha.com]
    1e100 = 1*10^100 = a Googol = 10 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 [wolframalpha.com]
  • Re:1e400.net? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Pharmboy (216950) on Monday February 08 2010, @11:22AM (#31060712) Journal

    Domain Name: 1E400.NET
          Registrar: ENOM, INC.
          Whois Server: whois.enom.com
          Referral URL: http://www.enom.com/ [enom.com]
          Name Server: NS1.NONEXISTE.NET
          Name Server: NS2.NONEXISTE.NET
          Status: clientTransferProhibited
          Updated Date: 08-feb-2010
          Creation Date: 08-feb-2010
          Expiration Date: 08-feb-2011

    It just has a picture of a very nice rainbow, over some island city.

  • Re:And... so what? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Xest (935314) on Monday February 08 2010, @11:59AM (#31061070)

    Rather than repeat myself, see my post here:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1541436&cid=31060452 [slashdot.org]

    Effectively it's a non-story, hyped up into a story by typical The Register anti-Google trolling.

    I don't like a lot of things Google does, particularly Schmidt's "done nothing wrong, got nothing to hide" style comments, but really, non-stories like this are just utterly stupid and as they're part of The Register's agenda based bullshit wagon, don't even deserve to be entertained.

  • Re:Slashdot helps (Score:4, Informative)

    by aywwts4 (610966) on Monday February 08 2010, @12:23PM (#31061382)

    Slashdot really has stayed still while the internet changed and matured around it, other than the absence of some memes and Y2K stories the slashdot of '99 looks much like today. (For better or worse) ...

    We are the tech Luddites!

    And yes "Slashdotting" is such and incredibly dated and egocentric word dating back to when our population was something to be impressed with, that day has long since passed, the few times we do "slashdot" a real server everyone gets all giddy, and I just don't have the heart to tell them that it was fine when it hit our front-page, but it just hit the front of reddit and digg.

    (If you don't recall what it looked like, this is what ten years of progress on a cutting edge geek/tech site looks like http://web.archive.org/web/19991013054427/http://slashdot.org/ [archive.org] )

  • Re:1e400.net? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Chapter80 (926879) on Monday February 08 2010, @12:26PM (#31061412)

    A young intern, who later committed suicide in a bizarre self decapitation with a chainsaw, suggested that 1 to the 400th power was actually a gogool.

    *actually its 1 to 100th power

    Of course, 1 to the 100th power is the same as 1 to the 400th power, is the same as 1.
    You mean TEN to the 100th power.

  • Re:Not misspelled (Score:5, Informative)

    by sopssa (1498795) * <sopssa@email.com> on Monday February 08 2010, @12:55PM (#31061834) Journal

    Because they originally did:

    "Sean and Larry were in their office, using the whiteboard, trying to think up a good name - something that related to the indexing of an immense amount of data," Koller writes.

    "Sean verbally suggested the word 'googolplex' [a one followed by a googol zeros], and Larry responded verbally with the shortened form, 'googol'....Sean was seated at his computer terminal, so he executed a search of the Internet domain name registry database to see if the newly suggested name was still available for registration and use.

    "Sean is not an infallible speller, and he made the mistake of searching for the name spelled as "google.com," which he found to be available. Larry liked the name, and within hours he took the step of registering the name 'google.com" for himself and [fellow co-founder] Sergey [Brin]."

  • by Animats (122034) on Monday February 08 2010, @02:15PM (#31062730) Homepage

    For a brief period on February 5, "en.wikipedia.org" was directed by DNS to an address at "pw-in-f139.1e100.net" [wikipedia.org]. That was quickly corrected, although it may have happened more than once. Apparently somebody at Google sent out some bad DNS records. (Google is now in the DNS business, remember.) [google.com] They need to be more careful.

  • by chrisd (1457) * <chrisd@dibona.com> on Monday February 08 2010, @05:29PM (#31065334) Homepage
    Hey, the fellows in netops asked me to clarify for you folks here's the story:

    1e100.net is a Google-owned domain name used to identify the servers in our network. Following standard industry practice, we make sure each IP address has a corresponding hostname. Starting in October 2009, we started using a single domain name to identify our servers across all Google products, rather than use different product domains such as youtube.com, blogger.com, and google.com. We did this for two reasons: first, to keep things simpler, and second, to proactively improve security by protecting against potential threats such as cross-site scripting attacks. Most typical Internet users will never see 1e100.net, but we picked we picked a Googley name for it just in case (1e100 is scientific notation for 1 googol).

    So there you go!

  • Re:Accuracy? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Xest (935314) on Monday February 08 2010, @05:38PM (#31065472)

    You do realise that there is a legal separation between the government and the BBC right?

    The BBC exists by royal mandate, it is entirely separate from government and the government has no influence over it. This is exactly what makes the BBC one of the least bias news sources out there, because any bias can only exist at an individual level, and even then is accountable to the BBC Trust which oversees it. It also has a mandate to transparently handle complaints- the same can't be said of commercial channels like Sky news for example, who may choose to just ignore your complaint and broadcast whatever they wish within the bounds of the law.

    Interestingly, this is also why the BBC has historically been able to get reporters where many other Western news channels have struggled, for example Alan Johnston in Gaza before his kidnap and eventual release. The BBC's objectivity is recognised world wide, there are a few exceptions, for example, the current Iranian leadership, but the Taliban for example have also been willing to give interviews where others have struggled.

    The BBC's somewhat unique situation is actually good for a lot of televised British news in general because it forces other media outlets to raise the bar somewhat also- Channel 4 News, ITV News for example are of very high quality in comparison to the likes of Fox, and even many Newspapers such as The Daily Mail, The Telegraph and so forth.

  • by aywwts4 (610966) on Monday February 08 2010, @05:40PM (#31065526)

    6 months of 100 user's squid logs to grep, 1e100 turns up nothing other than the image on this story's link, it can't be http.

    We use Google for everything including our site wide mail, advertising, website Analytics, and even our DNS and Chrome is the default browser at a lot of locations, then we have the android handsets... (The owners have daughters working at Google, but hey, we aren't a Microsoft shop, and their daughters already sold them on the value of Linux for everything else, so my life is easy.)

FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #15 A: The Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Q: What was the greatest achievement in taxidermy?

Working...