Skip to main content

Hassles with Uniforum and co.za registration

Dreams of Technology foiled by pokey companies
I've previously found that the Uniforum email form does not allow for providing more than a certain, fixed, number of nameservers.  Apparently nobody would ever require more than that number.  Well unless they're using a high availability DNS service (like www.dnsmadeeasy.com) that is.  If you happen to be using more nameservers than Uniforum has determined to be the maximum that South Africans need then they won't register your domain.

More recently I've found that they don't like nameservers where the FQDN lookup doesn't match the reverse lookup.  This is pretty much understandable, but what I don't understand is why it was working for a particular host I use until a month ago and is now no longer working.

I raised a support ticket with Uniforum and it took them a good couple of days to come back to me.  I wonder how a company that charges R 50 for every single co.za domain offers such poor service and such an antiquated API (email forms?  I mean really).

To put things in perspective.  To register a domain in .com costs about R 67 (without shopping around).  This is R 17 more than a co.za domain. 

There are many benefits to using a .com domain:
  1. foreign customers will recognize .com better, 
  2. it's easier to say on the radio, 
  3. domains can be locked against transfers, 
  4. you can register them automatically, 
  5. you can register them for multiple years at a time, and 
  6. you don't have to hassle with Uniforum.
Is it time for another company to replace Uniforum?
Labels:

Comments

  1. webhostingreview2 August 2011 at 05:35

    DNS service to sharing to users great ,nice post to sharing of this article.web hosting review

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Solving Doctrine - A new entity was found through the relationship

There are so many different problems that people have with the Doctrine error message: exception 'Doctrine\ORM\ORMInvalidArgumentException' with message 'A new entity was found through the relationship 'App\Lib\Domain\Datalayer\UnicodeLookups#lookupStatus' that was not configured to cascade persist operations for entity: Searching through the various online sources was a bit of a nightmare.  The best documentation I found was at  http://www.krueckeberg.org/  where there were a number of clearly explained examples of various associations. More useful information about association ownership was in the Doctrine manual , but I found a more succinct explanation in the answer to this question on StackOverflow . Now I understood better about associations and ownership and was able to identify exactly what sort I was using and the syntax that was required. I was implementing a uni-directional many to one relationship, which is supposedly one of the most simpl...
Post a Comment
Read more

Grokking PHP monolog context into Elastic

An indexed and searchable centralized log is one of those tools that once you've had it you'll wonder how you managed without it.    I've experienced a couple of advantages to using a central log - debugging, monitoring performance, and catching unknown problems. Debugging Debugging becomes easier because instead of poking around grepping text logs on servers you're able to use a GUI to contrast and compare values between different time ranges. A ticket will often include sparse information about the problem and observed error, but if you know more or less when a problem occurred then you can check the logs of all your systems at that time. Problem behaviour in your application can occur as a result of the services you depend on.  A database fault will produce errors in your application, for example. If you log your database errors and your application errors in the same central platform then it's much more convenient to compare behaviour between...
Post a Comment
Read more

Translating a bit of the idea behind domain driven design into code architecture

I've often participated in arguments discussions about whether thin models or thin controllers should be preferred.  The wisdom of a thin controller is that if you need to test your controller in isolation then you need to stub the dependencies of your request and response. It also violates the single responsibility principal because the controller could have multiple reasons to change.   Seemingly, the alternative is to settle on having fat models. This results in having domain logic right next to your persistence logic. If you ever want to change your persistence layer you're going to be in for a painful time. That's a bit of a cargo cult argument because honestly who does that, but it's also a violation of the single responsibility principal.   One way to decouple your domain logic from both persistence and controller is to use the "repository pattern".   Here we encapsulate domain logic into a data service. This layer deals exclusively with imple...
Post a Comment
Read more