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

Using Fail2Ban to protect a Varnished site from scrapers

I'm using Varnish to cache a fairly busy property site.  Varnish works like a bomb for normal users and has greatly improved our page load speed. For bots that are scraping the site, presumably to add the property listings to their own site, though the cache is next to useless since the bots are sequentially trawling through the whole site. I decided to use fail2ban to block IP's who hit the site too often. The first step in doing so was to enable a disk based access log for Varnish so that fail2ban will have something to work with. This means setting up varnishncsa.  Add this to your /etc/rc.local file: varnishncsa -a -w /var/log/varnish/access.log -D -P /var/run/varnishncsa.pid This starts up varnishncsa in daemon mode and appends Varnish access attempts to /var/log/varnish/access.log Now edit or create /etc/logrotate.d/varnish and make an entry to rotate this access log: /var/log/varnish/*log { create 640 http log compress ...
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

Separating business logic from persistence layer in Laravel

There are several reasons to separate business logic from your persistence layer.  Perhaps the biggest advantage is that the parts of your application which are unique are not coupled to how data are persisted.  This makes the code easier to port and maintain. I'm going to use Doctrine to replace the Eloquent ORM in Laravel.  A thorough comparison of the patterns is available  here . By using Doctrine I am also hoping to mitigate the risk of a major version upgrade on the underlying framework.  It can be expected for the ORM to change between major versions of a framework and upgrading to a new release can be quite costly. Another advantage to this approach is to limit the access that objects have to the database.  Unless a developer is aware of the business rules in place on an Eloquent model there is a chance they will mistakenly ignore them by calling the ActiveRecord save method directly. I'm not implementing the repository pattern in all its ...
Post a Comment
Read more