How Many Feross’s Can Fit in One URL?
March 11th, 2009 | 4,604 views | 8 Comments » | TweetI decided to figure out how many Feross’s I could fit in one URL, with each one serving a different function. Here is my result:
http://feross.feross.org/feross/feross.feross?feross=feross#feross

You found the secret page.
If you remove a single “feross” from the URL, then you fail and don’t get to see the secret stuff hidden at this location!
Every feross serves a different function in the URL.
Can you name all the feross’s?
In order, they are:
- subdomain
- domain name
- TLD – top level domain (technically this one isn’t a feross …yet!)
- folder
- file name
- file extension
- “get” parameter
- “get” value
- URL anchor (or hash)
Ok, back to studying for finals!
EDIT: updated TLD description because it’s .org not .feross. Thanks Daniel!

You would, Feross.
Yes, Sidd, I would.
And I did.
Btw! This is massively obsessive and massively compulsive (especially given my orgo final tomorrow and my stack of grading Adventure waiting to happen), but that third line item is wrong. The TLD is .org, not .feross. Even you, sir, are not yet on par with the set of all nonprofits, the American government, and the world’s independent nations
Daniel, right you are! I put the TLD in the list for completeness, but I forgot that I was listing the feross’s, not the components of a URL.
I just updated the post. BTW, your automatically generated Gravatar next to your name is hilarious!
Hahaha between the my comment and yours, I updated my gravatar…
PS you could hack firefox to create firefeross, where feross: is valid URI scheme. Then you could update your ResComp registration to give your laptop the hostname ‘feross’. Now check this–at least on the Stanford network,
feross://feross@feross.feross/feross/feross.feross?feross=feross#feross
could be a valid URL. Booyah.
we love you, man, but aren’t you stretching the bounds of redundancy?
Phil, yes I am stretching the boundaries of redundancy.
Phil, yes I am stretching the boundaries of redundancy.
Phil, yes I am stretching the boundaries of redundancy.
Haha. Thanks for the comment.