Re: ISNIC DNS
On 08/05/13 17:06, Dave Cross wrote: ISNIC is the Icelandic domain registrar. They deal with the .is ccTLD. They have slightly non-standard requirements for the DNS of .is domains. See http://www.isnic.is/en/domain/req for details. I usually host my DNS using Gandi. But they aren't on ISNIC's list of approved DNS suppliers, so when I bought fkth.is a couple of years ago, I ended up at dnspark.com, using their free service. Over the last few weeks I've been getting email from ISNIC telling me that my domain is in breach of the requirements and that if I don't fix in the next four weeks they will suspect my domain. They helpfully supply a page that checks your domain for compliance - http://www.isnic.is/en/domain/test Putting fkth.is in that gives the errors: Test results for FNS1.DNSPARK.NET: The IP address 2001:1850:1:0:107:0:0:d of nameserver fns1.dnspark.net is missing its PTR record or has an incorrect PTR record. Test results for FNS2.DNSPARK.NET: These are the nameservers for dnspark, so it's nothing that I have changed. Either dnspark have recently changed the config of these nameservers or ISNIC have only just got round to checking them. I've tried to talk to dnspark about this, but they won't give me any support as I'm on using a free server (yes, I know, you get what you pay for). Does anyone else own .is domains? Where do you host your DNS for them? Have you never had problems like this? Cheers, Dave... [Who is seriously considering replacing fkth.is with fkth.at] Too late. I have purchased fkth.at and will sell it to you for 1 million dollars.
Re: ISNIC DNS
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 2:06 AM, Dave Cross d...@dave.org.uk wrote: The IP address 2001:1850:1:0:107:0:0:d of nameserver fns1.dnspark.net is missing its PTR record or has an incorrect PTR record. $ host 2001:1850:1:0:107:0:0:d Host d.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.7.0.1.0.0.0.0.0.1.0.0.0.0.5.8.1.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa not found: 3(NXDOMAIN) Why not just add that PTR (IP - name) and be done with it? Paul
Re: ISNIC DNS
Quoting AJ Dhaliwal adhaliwa...@gmail.com: Dave... [Who is seriously considering replacing fkth.is with fkth.at] Too late. I have purchased fkth.at and will sell it to you for 1 million dollars. First rule of domains: never mention in public a domain you might be interested in, without buying it first. http://whois.net/whois/fkth.at Dave...
Re: ISNIC DNS
On 8 May 2013 10:37, Dave Cross d...@dave.org.uk wrote: http://whois.net/whois/fkth.at changed:20130508 11:14:29 Is their clock fast, or is that Icelandic time?
Re: ISNIC DNS
On 08/05/2013, at 7:37 PM, Dave Cross wrote: Quoting AJ Dhaliwal adhaliwa...@gmail.com: Dave... [Who is seriously considering replacing fkth.is with fkth.at] Too late. I have purchased fkth.at and will sell it to you for 1 million dollars. First rule of domains: never mention in public a domain you might be interested in, without buying it first. http://whois.net/whois/fkth.at Sounds like a useful url shortener.
Re: ISNIC DNS
for us outer suburban dwellers, it looks like fkthcity.net is still available. On 08/05/2013, at 8:04 PM, Will Crawford wrote: On 8 May 2013 10:37, Dave Cross d...@dave.org.uk wrote: http://whois.net/whois/fkth.at changed:20130508 11:14:29 Is their clock fast, or is that Icelandic time?
Re: ISNIC DNS
Quoting Kieren Diment dim...@gmail.com: On 08/05/2013, at 7:37 PM, Dave Cross wrote: Quoting AJ Dhaliwal adhaliwa...@gmail.com: Dave... [Who is seriously considering replacing fkth.is with fkth.at] Too late. I have purchased fkth.at and will sell it to you for 1 million dollars. First rule of domains: never mention in public a domain you might be interested in, without buying it first. http://whois.net/whois/fkth.at Sounds like a useful url shortener. That's actually what fkth.is (or .at) is going to be. Dave...
URL shorteners (was: Re: ISNIC DNS)
On 8 May 2013, at 11:07, Kieren Diment dim...@gmail.com wrote: On 08/05/2013, at 7:37 PM, Dave Cross wrote: Quoting AJ Dhaliwal adhaliwa...@gmail.com: Dave... [Who is seriously considering replacing fkth.is with fkth.at] Too late. I have purchased fkth.at and will sell it to you for 1 million dollars. First rule of domains: never mention in public a domain you might be interested in, without buying it first. http://whois.net/whois/fkth.at Sounds like a useful url shortener. Getting off-topic here, but what use are URL shorteners now that Twitter converts all links to be t.co/blah ? They don't save you any space in tweets, and they obfuscate the URL you're linking to. Is link-tracking really that useful? Sam -- Website: http://www.illuminated.co.uk/
Re: URL shorteners (was: Re: ISNIC DNS)
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 01:01:53PM +0100, Sam Kington wrote: [...] Getting off-topic here, but what use are URL shorteners now that Twitter converts all links to be t.co/blah ? They don't save you any space in tweets, and they obfuscate the URL you're linking to. Is link-tracking really that useful? Twitter isn't the only place where one might want to shorten links.
Re: URL shorteners (was: Re: ISNIC DNS)
On 08/05/2013, at 10:01 PM, Sam Kington s...@illuminated.co.uk wrote: On 8 May 2013, at 11:07, Kieren Diment dim...@gmail.com wrote: On 08/05/2013, at 7:37 PM, Dave Cross wrote: Quoting AJ Dhaliwal adhaliwa...@gmail.com: Dave... [Who is seriously considering replacing fkth.is with fkth.at] Too late. I have purchased fkth.at and will sell it to you for 1 million dollars. First rule of domains: never mention in public a domain you might be interested in, without buying it first. http://whois.net/whois/fkth.at Sounds like a useful url shortener. Getting off-topic here, but what use are URL shorteners now that Twitter converts all links to be t.co/blah ? They don't save you any space in tweets, and they obfuscate the URL you're linking to. Is link-tracking really that useful? If Dave got of his behind by now and implemented it I would have posted an informative reason in this email right now via a shortened url : http://fkth.is/sh1t URL shorteners were around well before twitter.
Re: URL shorteners (was: Re: ISNIC DNS)
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Sam Kington s...@illuminated.co.uk wrote: Getting off-topic here, but what use are URL shorteners now that Twitter converts all links to be t.co/blah ? They don't save you any space in tweets, and they obfuscate the URL you're linking to. Is link-tracking really that useful? Not only are they of marginal utility in almost all cases, they are actively harmful in many others. Ben
Re: URL shorteners (was: Re: ISNIC DNS)
On 8 May 2013 13:48, Ben Evans benjamin.john.ev...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Sam Kington s...@illuminated.co.uk wrote: Getting off-topic here, but what use are URL shorteners now that Twitter converts all links to be t.co/blah ? They don't save you any space in tweets, and they obfuscate the URL you're linking to. Is link-tracking really that useful? Not only are they of marginal utility in almost all cases, they are actively harmful in many others. Ben If you generate QR Codes, shortened links are actually very useful. -- Jerome Eteve +44(0)7738864546 http://www.eteve.net/
Re: URL shorteners (was: Re: ISNIC DNS)
On 8 May 2013, at 14:21, Jérôme Étévé jerome.et...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 May 2013 13:48, Ben Evans benjamin.john.ev...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Sam Kington s...@illuminated.co.uk wrote: Getting off-topic here, but what use are URL shorteners now that Twitter converts all links to be t.co/blah ? They don't save you any space in tweets, and they obfuscate the URL you're linking to. Is link-tracking really that useful? Not only are they of marginal utility in almost all cases, they are actively harmful in many others. If you generate QR Codes, shortened links are actually very useful. If you stab yourself in the face repeatedly with a rusty knife, bandages that automatically inject you with a tetanus vaccine are actually very useful. Sam -- Website: http://www.illuminated.co.uk/
Re: URL shorteners (was: Re: ISNIC DNS)
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 01:01:53PM +0100, Sam Kington wrote: Getting off-topic here, but what use are URL shorteners now that Twitter converts all links to be t.co/blah ? They don't save you any space in tweets, and they obfuscate the URL you're linking to. Is link-tracking really that useful? There's a world outside twitter, and URLs that line-wrap can be a pain in the arse depending on what email clients people are using, what MUAs messed around with stuff in the middle, and the phase of the moon. -- David Cantrell Professor of Unvironmental Science University of Human Progress
Re: URL shorteners (was: Re: ISNIC DNS)
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 02:32:24PM +0100, Sam Kington wrote: On 8 May 2013, at 14:21, Jérôme Étévé jerome.et...@gmail.com wrote: If you generate QR Codes, shortened links are actually very useful. If you stab yourself in the face repeatedly with a rusty knife, bandages that automatically inject you with a tetanus vaccine are actually very useful. QR codes are very useful, just not when printed on the sides of buses which is where you usually see them. For example, they're useful in museum catalogues. The VA sometimes make very good use of them to provide links from a description in an exhibition catalogue to a website, and I've seen art galleries make use of them to have a buy this now link on the wall next to a work. -- David Cantrell | Godless Liberal Elitist [OS X] appeals to me as a monk, a user, a compiler-of-apps, a sometime coder, and an easily amused primate with a penchant for those that are pretty, colorful, and make nice noises. -- Dan Birchall, in The Monastery
Re: URL shorteners (was: Re: ISNIC DNS)
On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 13:01 +0100, Sam Kington wrote: Getting off-topic here, but what use are URL shorteners now that Twitter converts all links to be t.co/blah ? They don't save you any space in tweets, and they obfuscate the URL you're linking to. Is link-tracking really that useful? IRC? Links that take more than one line are annoying, and some even manage to hit the 512-character limit.
Re: URL shorteners (was: Re: ISNIC DNS)
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 02:56:33PM +0100, Dominic Humphries wrote: On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 13:01 +0100, Sam Kington wrote: Getting off-topic here, but what use are URL shorteners now that Twitter converts all links to be t.co/blah ? They don't save you any space in tweets, and they obfuscate the URL you're linking to. Is link-tracking really that useful? IRC? Links that take more than one line are annoying, and some even manage to hit the 512-character limit. The mention of the new-fangled IRC thing made me wonder if anyone has been perverse enough to create a link-shortener that serves things via gopher, or some other quirky protocol. Although I can see an immediate flaw in this plan - link shorteners rely on HTTP redirection codes, which I think that most other protocols don't have. Meanwhile, Dave notes that this thread has going wildly off at a tangent from the original problem - who to use to serve DNS for an Icelandic domain. Nicholas Clark
WWW::Lovefilm::API?
Anyone still using this? Assuming you have credentials from before they shut it off.
Re: URL shorteners (was: Re: ISNIC DNS)
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 03:27:36PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote: [...] The mention of the new-fangled IRC thing made me wonder if anyone has been perverse enough to create a link-shortener that serves things via gopher, or some other quirky protocol. Although I can see an immediate flaw in this plan - link shorteners rely on HTTP redirection codes, which I think that most other protocols don't have. Gopher can't send HTTP status codes, but it can serve up HTML files, in which you can have a meta http-equiv=refresh ..., some JavaScript, and/or some HTML saying click here. The real problem is browser support of Gopher. None of the common popular browsers support it any more. Meanwhile, Dave notes that this thread has going wildly off at a tangent from the original problem - who to use to serve DNS for an Icelandic domain. Several of us run our own DNS servers and could host it if need be.
Re: URL shorteners (was: Re: ISNIC DNS)
On 8 May 2013, at 17:09, Peter Corlett wrote: The real problem is browser support of Gopher. None of the common popular browsers support it any more. Clearly they are not fit for purpose then! ;-) G.
