So it is possible …

Update August 28th 2021: I have identified some TLDs that apparently can be used for testing purposes. I have updated the text as indicated.

… to have DNS top level domains for bargains (.bargain), the bible (.bible), black friday (.blackfriday) and marketing and social networking (.buzz), but it is not possible to have a TLD reserved for documentation and testing purposes. Instead, (see Update below).

Examples that use „“ are in widespread circulation,  a domain which is owned by IANA but points to a system controlled by Verizon, Inc.:

dig +short

whois | grep ^person
person: Derrick Sawyer

Search LinkedIn for Mr. Derrick Sawyer. 🙂

Update: I have to correct myself at this point: RFC 2606 propagates the following TLDs for testing purposes, they shall never be included in the root zone of public DNS:

  • .test – A TLD that will never be public and can be used in non-public DNS for testing/demonstration purposes.
  • .example – A TLD that will never be public and can be used in documentation.
  • .invalid – A TLD that will never be public and can be used in documentation, indicating DNS records that can not be resolved.

My advice is, to use these and do not use example.(com|org) or anything else in your documentation.

… to have browsers ship with DNS over HTTPS (DoH), pointing to Cloudflare, Inc. as provider, but there is no freely available DoH server. Instead, widespread examples combine Nginx, a freemium web proxy/server software controlled by F5, Inc., with a DNS resolver such as Unbound.

… to have all major DNS servers ship with an off-switch called „DNSSEC“, operated by Verisign, Inc., controlled by the government of the USA,but not one major DNS server software can serve DNS over HTTPS/TLS natively. Instead, again, constructs involving proxy software which will mess up access control are suggested by widespread documents.

DNS is messed up.