| |
| ▲ | slyall 6 days ago | parent | next [-] | | The are supposed to also filter things like complaints. If somebody complains I'm sending spam and I only pay $20/year then my registrar might lock my domain and then I have to work to get it back online. Mark Monitor will apply a lot more filtering to complaints. Ironically this is allegedly what happened in this case, a complaint about the domain got it taken offline. | |
| ▲ | reilly3000 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | They generally do full service brand monitoring to protect IP and maintain continuity. You would outsource monitoring for trademark infringement to them, and be certain that domain renewals are done perfectly for a portfolio of high value domains. | | |
| ▲ | lolinder 6 days ago | parent [-] | | Which is why this outage is so weird: the entire point of paying MarkMonitor is ensuring that absolutely nothing goes wrong with a very fraught process, and they seem to have just taken down one of the biggest brands they support. | | |
| ▲ | throwanem 6 days ago | parent [-] | | Precisely. You pay a company like this the nosebleed-inducing fees they charge so that this exact event never happens. That assurance, and not the mechanics of domain registration or canned web searches or whatever else, is their product. It's like, as I'm sure I'm paraphrasing from something I read God alone knows how many years ago, if your publicist lets you walk into a press event with a giant blob of snot hanging out of your nose. There surely is a reason why that error occurred, and it probably is at least a pretty good reason. But no one is very surprised to see the intro invite from your new publicist. It isn't a relationship you blow up on a whim, but Zoom that can't route call traffic is Zoom that's not generating revenue, and while the reputational impact is negligible if it happens once, it had really better happen only once. Zoom is the incumbent; no one remembers they were revolutionary once, now everyone only notices the parts they don't like. (Being a skilled but politically naïve sysadmin is much the same.) Basically, this is why Ma Bell - which had about the only stronger possible "uptime" expectation, in that no one uses Zoom for 911 - was so uptight you couldn't even plug in a modem until about five minutes before divestiture, and specified everything down to the number of turns in the splices their technicians made. There was a fad among programmers, when I was a child, to consider such practices stodgy. | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | toast0 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Like others said, uptime for a registrar barely matters. For an important domain, I don't want anything to change, and if the registrar is down, nothing will change, so that's good. What MarkMonitor can provide is things like facilitating RegistryLock, which makes it even harder for changes to be made. And account reps that know what's going on. I hate working with account reps, but if they're knowledgable and easy to work with, it's ok. They do some trademark monitoring (thus the name), if you want to get your own related app taken down from Google Play :p (I'm not bitter, it was amusing). And presence services if you need to hold a domain in a weird location that wants a presence, they can probably arrange it, which is handy at times. I'd love to know more details on this incident, MarkMonitor had a bulletproof reputation as a registrar that won't fuck up. Godaddy doesn't, but then I didn't realize they had taken over the contract for .us | |
| ▲ | kryptiskt 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | They can offer humans in the loop, and those cost a lot. Like, a real live human will contact you and ask if you really want to transfer microsoft.com to Shady Shell Company (Bermuda) Ltd. Porkbun's pricing model is less attractive when your domains are worth billions to you. | |
| ▲ | BrandoElFollito 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Why would uptime matter that much for a registrar? (As opposed to a DNS server, including root servers - and even then DNS has provisions for downtime, not to mention redundancy in configurations) |
|
