
Name.com: Another Unscrupulous Registrar - nathanhammond
http://www.nathanhammond.com/namedotcom-another-unscrupulous-registrar
======
jtwb
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 Follow the steps that tell you to switch your name servers - that makes
CloudFlare your DNS provider

4 Go to "Edit DNS Settings"

5 Find the "A * (some IP)" record, and remove it

That's it. No more parker ads. DNS and name server changes can take a while to
propagate to the whole web so the change can take up to an hour to affect
everyone.

Edit: this is the "*" record you need to remove:
<http://i.imgur.com/jc48t.png>

~~~
humblest_ever
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.

~~~
derefr
> 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.

~~~
sandGorgon
I have used Namecheap's customer service (my fault entirely) and it has been
super excellent. They usually have a turnaround time of a few hours and are
24X7.

They also have a forum where you can request for specific features - a couple
of months back I posted requesting for account management pages to be made
HTTPS.. and now they are. Dunno if the post made a difference.

However, their branding is stupid: I cant get my clients to register their
domains on anything called "cheap" - especially corporate ones. I suggest
gandi.net in that case.

------
nbpoole
As an anecdotal counterpoint, I'm an extremely happy Name.com customer. I
transfered several domains to them a year or so ago from GoDaddy. They support
two-factor authentication, their interface is uncluttered, I pay them less
money than I paid GoDaddy, and I haven't had a single issue. I would highly
recommend them to anyone looking for a registrar.

That being said, I don't use them for DNS. If this is a feature of their
nameservers, I do find it strange that they don't offer a way to opt out
(other than using alternative nameservers).

~~~
nathanhammond
This is what initially drew me to name.com, they seemed to have their act
together. Unfortunately there just isn't a way to fully evaluate a situation
without trying it first.

Just as I don't give GoDaddy business any longer due to their poor corporate
ethics, I can't recommend name.com as a registrar because I must take into
account the way in which they run the rest of their business. I will be
ceasing my relationship with name.com as soon as reasonably possible.

------
endtwist
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 their policy, but there is nothing forcing you to keep
their nameservers beyond the 5 minutes it takes you to change them post-
registration.

~~~
nathanhammond
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.

~~~
ip2k
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.

~~~
bigiain
From the article

"at a non-existent subdomain of Typewire's site"

Surely a non-existent subdomain should return a Name Error?

Unless you explicitly asked for a wildcard subdomain (which I realize the T&Cs
_say_ you did, even though you never intended too), then I'd expect
ww.realdomain.com and qqq.realdomain.com to return NXDOMAIN.

(and I agree with the post, adding a wildcard domain and putting ads on the
parked pages is nasty, insisting it's a core part of your business model when
called on it is evil, trying to then claim I'm somehow responsible for the ad
content on this pages is beyond stupid! I'd certainly never use a registrar
that chose to do that to me.)

------
brucehart
I've used name.com for many years and have always been satisfied with their
service. The advertising the author is complaining about only shows up if you
do not configure the DNS records or name servers after buying the domain.
Usually I spend 30 seconds setting this up as soon as I buy the domain, so the
advertising doesn't even cross my mind.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this practice was pretty standard
across the industry. The "unscrupulous" registrar tactics that I'm more
concerned about are registrars that take domains when they sense demand (such
as from searching or whois lookups) and hold it from you until you pay a
premium. I've never had this issue with name.com and have found it very easy
to transfer domains with them as well.

~~~
varikin
Actually, this isn't just if you don't setup DNS records for your domain name.
If you configure some subdomains with name.com, then all other subdomains for
that domain go to a parked page.

For example, my wife's website is jesleephotos.com. The subdomains store and
www (along with some others that I don't wish to advertise :) go to the
correct destination. The subdomain stuff, x, random, mail, etc all go to
parked domain.

I might end up adding an A record for *.jesleephotos.com as a catchall and
point it to some IP address I can get that will forward everything to www.

~~~
jasonlotito
So, don't use name.com's name servers if you don't like what they are
offering?

~~~
drm237
Yes, that's the logical conclusion. But purchasing a domain with the thought
that dns hosting is included in the purchase price only to find out the the
service doesn't work as it should, is valid a reason to be upset IMHO.

------
Undergrads
Have you tried Namecheap? I register all of my domains with them and they've
always exceeded my expectations.

~~~
fernandose
I second this, I have used namecheap for the past 5 years and have had no
problems.

~~~
thehodge
really happy namecheap customer here, have converted serveral friends and
never had problems, live chat support and cheap prices always :)

------
varikin
This is disheartening to read because I have been using name.com for over year
now and over, I had been happy. I did check one of my domains and found this
issue, but since for most of my domains, I don't have DNS managed by the
registrar, it doesn't affect me that much.

I guess I have to mull this over.

~~~
nathanhammond
It is the predatory behavior that basically amounts typo-squatting a domain
that I find most repulsive. I'm completely technically capable and yet I was
serving ads on my domain without being aware of it because they aren't
respecting the way in which DNS is supposed to work.

~~~
jasonlotito
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?

~~~
nathanhammond
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 with their aggressive monetization
strategy (which I do) to not use them as a registrar, either.

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

~~~
gommm
I have very good experiences with both namecheap and gandi... Gandi is by far
my favorite but they are a bit pricy...

------
ohashi
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 expensive as
Netsol/register.com) are barely above cost.

Since Fabulous isn't available for most of you (unless you want to pay
retail). I would recommend NameCheap.

~~~
AlexC04
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 :)

~~~
ohashi
If you've got a few hundred I may be able to help you out in getting an
account. Contact me from my profile.

------
epenn
I've been using iwantmyname.com and I have yet to have any issues. Sorry to
hear about your troubles, Nathan. DNS hijacking is bad enough, but the fact
that they claim you're the one who is liable for what they happen to put on
their parked pages is completely unethical.

------
jrockway
Am I the only one that uses DynDNS? Their service is excellent.

~~~
m0nastic
I use DynDNS for all my Registrar and DNS-related stuff; I couldn't be happier
with them. Whenever I change a record, it populates hella-fast; and
considering how wishy-washy I am about sticking with an email provider, it's
very helpful.

------
pdx
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 with them for awhile. What's the harm?

~~~
nathanhammond
The harm is that they're effectively typo-squatting my domain, as well as all
the rest of their customers' domains which don't use wildcard A records.
They're breaking DNS.

Typo-squatting is addressed by both the ACPA
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Pro...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Protection_Act))
and the UDRP ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Domain-Name_Dispute-
Res...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Domain-Name_Dispute-
Resolution_Policy)).

And worse, you're held responsible for the content of that page.

~~~
jrockway
_And worse, you're held responsible for the content of that page._

I feel like you're not. When the subpoena is served, it will be to the owner
of the IP with the content on it, not the owner of a random DNS entry that
happens to resolve to that IP. Even if it does, I imagine the exchange going
like this: "Your honor, I have no access to that server and can't control the
content in any way." "Right, this is a waste of my time."

Contracts can say whatever they want. Whether or not they are actually
enforceable is a whole 'nother ball game.

------
o6uoq
I've managed thousands of domains over dozens of countries. This is NOT
standard practice and should never be accepted to be so. After using many,
many registrars there are only a few to recommend..

\- Namecheap (my favourite, all my domains are here, excellent customer
service - the Zappos of domains - instant support, live chat 24/7,
friendly/educated staff, and just a real pleasure to use)

\- Domain Monster - UK/European based domains. Good services, good response
times

\- Europe Registry / Instra - used this commercially, more expensive, not the
greatest of control panels, but more than likely you will be appointed an
account manager (hence good for businesses) and pretty much have the largest
database of domain extensions to register against. If you are interested in
moving to them, I can also put you in touch with a very friendly chap who can
help you make the move.

I hope this information helps - reply me up on @o6uoq if you'd like to chat
about anything else :)

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

~~~
nathanhammond
My next registration will be with these guys: <http://www.gandi.net/>

I can't speak from experience but I've heard good things about them.

~~~
pygy_
They're very good. I use them for several domains, and I have never had any
issues with their service.

------
dustingetz
" _I am now convinced that domain registration is the seedy underbelly of the
entire Internet and only attracts companies with questionable ethics._ "

this is the market equilibrium, in any industry, for companies that compete on
price.

------
ez77
I know I'm late to this thread, but I'm curious: how come actual
entrepreneurs, people that get things done, do not set up a catch-all the
Record Host "*.example.com" immediately after setting up their domains? I did
that with mine (not worthy of being published), with Name.com, and had no
domain parking ever.

By the way, to me the most incredible part is this widespread practice of
domain parking by default and without sharing revenues, not the threatening
legalese. Not much domain ownership there!

------
tknows
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.

------
Biker
I agree that the situation is legally impossible: basically they are trying to
hold you responsible for code they add and which you cannot touch. Won't keep
up in court.

Secondly it does not look good for the site owner, as some have a few
subdomains and users might make a typo. 3rdly, Godaddy and others also do
this, but at least they 'share' any 'profit'.

Anyway, I just got my first few domains at name.com and just forwarded them to
another domain. No spampages. Cheers

------
scythe
The best domain registrar of which I'm aware -- everyone I know who's used it
has been happy with it -- is <http://nearlyfreespeech.net/>. I've also used
DynDNS and been very happy with them; someone else mentioned them as well.

NFS doesn't make it obvious that they do domain registration -- you have to
click through to "services" to see it.

------
paulocal
Ive been using <http://Dynadot.com> Its run by developers. They are awesome.
Make it really easy to manage your domains and get new ones. Give it a shot -
youre bound to love it. (no i do not work for them)

------
lurchpop
TLDR; name.com will insert a page under your domain, against your will, that
may or may not have illegal material on it. If it does, YOU ARE LIABLE!
Fucking ridiculous.

Wouldn't creating a wildcard subdomain prevent it from hitting one of their
parked pages?

------
duck
Why is there no one on HN that runs a registrar? Seems like there could be
room for a startup here that could compete on pricing and offer some unique
services.

~~~
quicksilver03
Judging by the information on the ICANN and Verisign sites, there are quite
steep financial requirements to fulfill and paperwork to submit to become an
accredited registrar.

------
johndbritton
Number one favorite registrar and DNS host of all: DNSimple.

No upselling, no adverts at all.

Sweet REST API.

Account sharing so multiple users can manage domains.

There's a Ruby gem so you can register from the command line.

They also have an iPhone app.

<https://dnsimple.com/r/4f322c139863f6>

(disclosure: that's a referral URL that gives me and the person who uses it a
free month of service, but I do love DNSimple)

------
dberube
Moniker.com -- simply the best, no jokes.

------
shareme
I am in process of determining which registrar to choose for some startups I
am setting up..HN users thoughts on past registrars that you have used?

~~~
latortuga
When I was searching for a registrar I consulted several HN threads and
settled on namecheap.com. It has been great and I would definitely recommend
it, as have a few others in this thread.

------
jasonlotito
Considering you can easily change the default nameserver settings, I don't see
how this is an issue. Really, your just trying to imagine problems. Maybe
you'd be so kind as to direct our attention to when this specific issue has
caused problems for Name.com customers in the past?

~~~
ohashi
A ton of domains have been brought to UDRP for showing parking ads. Some
domains might have been legal except the ads infringed on someone else's IP.
Imagine owning apple.com for your apple store but apple computer ads started
appearing contextually. You're screwed through no fault of your own.

At least with domain parking companies, you get the profit, name.com is plain
old screwing you over.

~~~
jasonlotito
Care to share some of these domains then? A link would be helpful.

~~~
ohashi
"The Panel also believes that in using the disputed domain names to redirect
Internet users to websites that host links to external websites, including
websites of Complainant’s competitors, the Respondent has registered and used
the domain names in bad faith"

[http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2003/d2003...](http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2003/d2003-0031.html)

There is a starting point.

~~~
jasonlotito
The argument here is that this was intentional, not unintentional. Nothing in
here leads me to believe that someone claimed the domains and just happened to
leave them dormant on a registrar. Rather, they setup the domains with the
expressed intent to redirect internet users.

This is not what is being argued against Names.

You say it's a starting point. Considering it has no relation whatsoever, I
fail to see where it can lead. My searching has turned up nothing. Until
someone presents otherwise, I consider this entire argument and article FUD.

------
dorkitude
I personally don't care what kind of crappy parking pages they put up. When I
register a domain, I immediately point it at either dreamhost, ec2, or heroku,
depending on my fuzzy ideas about what it will one day become. I'd rather
type-in-traffic see an error page than a tacky parking page.

I'll stick with Name.com for all my non-COM/ORG/NET tld's.

