.dr.in domains list

What is .dr.in TLD

.dr.in domains are not an IANA-listed top‑level space; rather, “.dr.in” designates hostnames beneath the second‑level domain dr.in inside India’s .in country code. In practice, references to a “.dr.in TLD” describe third‑level registrations such as sample.dr.in. Within the .in ecosystem, registry-controlled second‑level zones (.co.in, .org.in, etc.) are distinct from privately managed labels like dr.in, where subdomain issuance is at the registrant’s discretion. For discovery and measurement of .dr.in websites, we rely on passive DNS, certificate transparency, and crawl telemetry to map active hosts, resolutions, and content signatures. Because policies are private, availability, governance, and lifespan vary by operator rather than by a public registry baseline. We provide objective visibility into this namespace’s footprint, behaviors, and risks. Explore webatla’s .dr.in domain datasets to validate scope and activity.

History and key features of .dr.in TLD

The history of .dr.in is not publicly documented at the registry level, because dr.in is a privately registered second‑level name under .in and not an official subdivision like .co.in. As a result, timelines for .dr.in domains reflect the registrant’s lifecycle and DNS changes rather than formal launch phases. Key features observed across .dr.in websites typically mirror the operator’s architecture: single or few authoritative name servers, consolidated hosting, variable TLS configurations, and governance tied to the dr.in owner’s policies. From a measurement standpoint, we correlate first-seen timestamps from passive DNS with certificate issuance and crawl recency to characterize stability and churn. This yields reproducible indicators for security posture, availability, and brand risk within the namespace. Review our .dr.in domain datasets for longitudinal characteristics and comparative baselines.

Why and who choose the .dr.in domain

Choosing the .dr.in domain is atypical: third‑level names exist only if authorized by the dr.in registrant, so adoption depends on that operator’s objectives. Potential users include internal project teams, brand campaigns, or service endpoints seeking short, consistent labels; however, reliance on a private namespace limits portability, mail deliverability predictability, and registrar‑level dispute options. We advise assessing governance clarity, SLA commitments, and DNS security before deploying .dr.in websites or registering .dr.in domains via any arrangement. For brand protection, monitor collisions, typos, and certificate issuance to detect abuse early; for engineering, evaluate CDN fit, caching, and geolocation alignment. Our analysis supports risk‑aware decisions using empirical telemetry and cross‑sectional benchmarks. Consult webatla’s .dr.in domain datasets to evaluate suitability and exposure.