On Oct 4, 2014, Corey Quinn <[email protected]> wrote:
>The answer to this is usually Mark Monitor.
>
>
>
>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 6:49 PM, Phil Pennock
><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> I know which registrars I like for personal use, there's a few which
>are
>> competent, but I'm having a hard time finding someone "not broken"
>for
>> corporate use by my employer. Suggestions welcome, but please see
>the
>> requirements.
>>
>> Requirements:
>>
>> 0. Registrar only; whether or not they do DNS, SSL certs, whatever is
>> irrelevant, as long as we can set DNS servers to point to our own
>> selection of NS hosts.
>> 1. No shared passwords; each user authorized to access the registrar
>> has their own account, with their own password.
>> 2. Strong desire that it also support 2FA, with admin overviews of
>who
>> does or does not have 2FA enabled; we'll reluctantly let this one
>> slide if we can find a provider who meets the other reqs.
>> 3. The user who signs in is not "the contact" in whois: role contacts
>> should be set for each publicly visible contact, _multiple_ people
>> able to make technical changes, etc.
>> 4. Whois privacy service available (for those TLDs which allow it).
>> 5. Ideally, billing-only accounts, who can manage corporate
>> credit-cards on file, etc, but not make tech changes (and tech
>> accounts which can't retrieve billing details); but this one,
>again,
>> we can let slide.
>>
>> The bare minimum threshold is points 1 and 3 -- basically, competent
>> account management for the idea that the person accessing the service
>is
>> not "the customer" but "someone working at the customer". This is
>not a
>> high bar. Even in the SSL CA business, the DNS business and the CDN
>> business, it's not hard to find companies who can manage these
>points.
>> When the SSL CA business can pass the bar, I know it's not a high
>bar.
>>
>> Price is not a primary driver.
>>
>> Gandi is decent for personal use, but their way to implement 1 is to
>> fail on 3, because they've associated public NIC handle too closely
>with
>> user accounts. We do not want SPOFs in staff, not even for me ;)
>> because I could be hit by a bus sliding down a Pittsburgh hill in the
>> snow and become a pancake. Given that a modern Internet company has
>> their domain as a critical corporate asset, it's unacceptable to only
>> have a "shared known password" as the only protection on the domain.
>>
>> Please, who is there out there for companies, to have half-way
>competent
>> domain registration and access controls?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Phil
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> This list provided by the League of Professional System
>Administrators
>> http://lopsa.org/
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
> http://lopsa.org/
NetNames is another.
--
Mr Flibble
King of the Potato People
http://www.linkedin.com/in/RobertLanning
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
http://lopsa.org/
