Name.com: Another Unscrupulous Registrar • Hacker News Board

Re: Name.com: Another Unscrupulous Registrar

#61

Post by AlexC04 » Wed, Apr 13, 2011, 11:23 PM UTC

ohashi wrote: post #34

For those of you looking for a good registrar. My hands down favorite is Fabulous.com right now. Caveat is they cater to large portfolios and certain extensions (com/net/org/info). They don't screw you over on anything though. Even if your names expire and someone buys it through drop process, you get a cut of the sale. They don't keep any domains for themselves. Prices (for portfolio holders, retail side is as expen…

Fabulous requires that your portfolio either makes $750 a month (with their parking services) or have at least 750 domains with them.

I have a personal goal of one day consolidating my domains with at Fabulous :) I'm getting there. In the short term I have my own private label registrar through Directi that isn't to shabby.

I think I'm paying around $8.50 USD per domain, with privacy included.

Bulk management is a bit of a pain - but that's what DomainManager is for :)

Re: Name.com: Another Unscrupulous Registrar

#62

Post by tknows » Wed, Apr 13, 2011, 11:51 PM UTC

I sometimes use Bluehost for domain registration and they do the same thing. I don't really have a problem with it because I know that once a domain is registered, my work isn't done until I've pointed nameservers somewhere else or set up a site on Bluehost and changed the default.html.

For $10 a year, I don't mind doing this.

Having said that, I do agree that it's hard to find a good domain registrar that covers lots of TLD, has a good interface and runs an ethical business.

Re: Name.com: Another Unscrupulous Registrar

#63

Post by humblest_ever » Thu, Apr 14, 2011, 12:08 AM UTC

jtwb wrote: post #52

Here's how to clean the ads from your domain. Name.com's DNS editor won't let you remove the DNS record that serves the ads. You need to switch to a real DNS provider. CloudFlare is a free DNS provider - generally people use it to hook up the CloudFlare security and auto-CDN system, but you just need it for DNS hosting. 1 Create an account and add your domain: www.cloudflare.com 2 Disable the orange cloud icons 3 Fol…

Correct. I found if you have an A * record to an ip you control, and a plain X.TLD record it covers everything.

This policy is infuriating to say the least. I have sent them several emails about it and gotten various, "we don't care," responses. It's very hard for me to describe how enraged I was when I found out, even after finding a solution on my own.

If I could find a registrar that didn't treat me like crap I would switch instantly.

Re: Name.com: Another Unscrupulous Registrar

#64

Post by humblest_ever » Thu, Apr 14, 2011, 12:10 AM UTC

nathanhammond wrote: post #27

jasonlotito wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically, you were using another aspect of their service without being aware of what that service was. Making assumptions isn't smart, no matter what company is involved. Personally, I rank using a registrars DNS beside using a registrars hosting service: it's common sense that you don't do it. I mean, do you really feel sympathy for people who stick with GoDaddy's hosting service?

As with everything, you have to learn the hard way the first time. The difference though is that no other registrar I've used (6 of them) has used such an aggressive tactic that breaks DNS for monetization purposes. Typically you change the default A record and you're rid of their parked page for good. The conclusion of my post was that one should not use name.com for DNS at all, and, if you have any ethical concerns…

Who do you use? I'd like to switch.

Re: Name.com: Another Unscrupulous Registrar

#65

Post by Niten » Thu, Apr 14, 2011, 12:36 AM UTC

Apocryphon wrote: post #2

So, um, what's a good alternative to all of these?

DynDNS

Re: Name.com: Another Unscrupulous Registrar

#66

Post by chrisbolt » Thu, Apr 14, 2011, 12:46 AM UTC

pdx wrote: post #26

I use name.com for quite a few domains. They have a very convenient way to do bulk changes, so you can, for example, select 50 domains at once, and tell name.com to change all of them to your name servers. They email you a few minutes later when they've done it. I always just change them to linode as soon as I buy a domain. I don't begrudge them this income stream from people who buy domains but don't do anything wit…

Why not just set your default nameservers, so that any domain you buy has the right nameservers automatically?

Re: Name.com: Another Unscrupulous Registrar

#67

Post by metageek » Thu, Apr 14, 2011, 1:01 AM UTC

endtwist wrote: post #10

It's a simple case of the company lawyer(s) overdoing a CYA clause and standing by it. However, the company seems to have gladly taken your call to discuss it with you, and then consult their lawyers regarding the potential for a change. While you didn't get what you want, it seems like they were fairly considerate. So, just change the nameservers after registration and move on. I understand if you disagree with thei…

No. Their policy is completely indefensible. They control what goes on the typosquatted page, but you're responsible for its content? Absurd.

Re: Name.com: Another Unscrupulous Registrar

#68

Post by derefr » Thu, Apr 14, 2011, 1:02 AM UTC

humblest_ever wrote: post #63

jtwb wrote: post #52

Here's how to clean the ads from your domain. Name.com's DNS editor won't let you remove the DNS record that serves the ads. You need to switch to a real DNS provider. CloudFlare is a free DNS provider - generally people use it to hook up the CloudFlare security and auto-CDN system, but you just need it for DNS hosting. 1 Create an account and add your domain: www.cloudflare.com 2 Disable the orange cloud icons 3 Fol…

Correct. I found if you have an A * record to an ip you control, and a plain X.TLD record it covers everything. This policy is infuriating to say the least. I have sent them several emails about it and gotten various, "we don't care," responses. It's very hard for me to describe how enraged I was when I found out, even after finding a solution on my own. If I could find a registrar that didn't treat me like crap I wo…

> If I could find a registrar that didn't treat me like crap I would switch instantly.

Namecheap has been excellent for the domains I've bought through it. I haven't yet had to talk to their customer service, but their management interface is simple and flexible enough that I haven't had to.

Re: Name.com: Another Unscrupulous Registrar

#69

Post by ip2k » Thu, Apr 14, 2011, 1:21 AM UTC

nathanhammond wrote: post #23

endtwist wrote: post #10

It's a simple case of the company lawyer(s) overdoing a CYA clause and standing by it. However, the company seems to have gladly taken your call to discuss it with you, and then consult their lawyers regarding the potential for a change. While you didn't get what you want, it seems like they were fairly considerate. So, just change the nameservers after registration and move on. I understand if you disagree with thei…

I have nothing bad to say about their support, and I hopefully made that clear in my original post. That doesn't, however, relieve them of their responsibility in my opinion to provide good services. The problem I have is that it wasn't immediately apparent that I was serving ads on my domain because they weren't respecting the way in which DNS is supposed to work--basically typo-squatting me.

Disclaimer: I work for a web hosting company. They are NOT affiliated in any way with name.com

The problem is that you don't understand how domain parking works. If you want to just own a domain but don't want it to go anywhere yet, you need to make records for that. "Domain parking" is the shady practice of putting up a "palceholder" page filled with ads.

Also...you don't know what "NXDOMAIN" is / means. Here are the RFCs:

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2308.txt -- " "NXDOMAIN" - an alternate expression for the "Name Error" RCODE as described in [RFC1035 Section 4.1.1] and the two terms are used interchangeably in this document."

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1035.txt "RCODE Response code - this 4 bit field is set as part of responses. The values have the following interpretation:

                0               No error condition

                1               Format error - The name server was
                                unable to interpret the query.

                2               Server failure - The name server was
                                unable to process this query due to a
                                problem with the name server.

                3               Name Error - Meaningful only for
                                responses from an authoritative name
                                server, this code signifies that the
                                domain name referenced in the query does
                                not exist."

That's right, NXDOMAIN = "domain name referenced in the query does not exist", which is FALSE in this situation, so why would their DNS server return that?

Name.com provides a FREE nameserver service which happens to have some strings attached. If you don't use their FREE DNS hosting service, those strings are NOT attached. I have been using name.com for years and have never had any problems. They don't do the same BS that places like Network Solutions do where they monitor what domains people are searching for an increase the prices based on that.

Seriously, learn what you're talking about before bashing a company publicly as much as this. I'm sure that a quick call or e-mail (also, who sends an e-mail requesting that a company call them? Protip: people in tech support HATE that...just ask your question in the e-mail) with a properly-worded question like "Yo, why does my domain name NOT return an 'nxdomain' code when I query your nameserver?" would have resulted in a clear and concise answer from them.

Is it BS that ads are put on parked domains? Sure, but then again, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PARK A DOMAIN.

Re: Name.com: Another Unscrupulous Registrar

#70

Post by ip2k » Thu, Apr 14, 2011, 1:26 AM UTC

nathanhammond wrote: post #27

jasonlotito wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically, you were using another aspect of their service without being aware of what that service was. Making assumptions isn't smart, no matter what company is involved. Personally, I rank using a registrars DNS beside using a registrars hosting service: it's common sense that you don't do it. I mean, do you really feel sympathy for people who stick with GoDaddy's hosting service?

As with everything, you have to learn the hard way the first time. The difference though is that no other registrar I've used (6 of them) has used such an aggressive tactic that breaks DNS for monetization purposes. Typically you change the default A record and you're rid of their parked page for good. The conclusion of my post was that one should not use name.com for DNS at all, and, if you have any ethical concerns…

"breaks DNS for monetization purposes" It's not their DNS that is broken, it's your understanding of how nameservers work. Also, failure to read terms and conditions doesn't make it their fault. It's kind of sketchy, yeah, but no one who is serious about a site / hosting should ever use registrar-provided DNS service when it's so easy to set up with your hosting company / by yourself.