Yeah. Seems like a reasonable thing. Get the domain, park it, use it for some specific project if needed.
Thanks all - that was illuminating. Kurt On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 12:54, James Kerr <[email protected]> wrote: > I would buy it, park it at godaddy and forward it to our main site. I wish I > could buy the .com version of our main domain of which we own .org and .net, > that would be cool but they want $2800 for it, so screw that, we dont need > it that bad. We are a .org anyway. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Sean Martin > To: NT System Admin Issues > Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 3:40 PM > Subject: Re: Any insight for me? > That's a good point. We own most of the iterations of our primary domain > (.com, .net, .coop, .org, .biz, etc.) for that very reason. We just redirect > them to our primary site. > > - Sean > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Steven M. Caesare <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> +1. >> >> >> >> I’ll also say $800 is pretty cheap for a domain resale. I sold one I had >> registered for a small biz for significantly more than that. For $800 I >> suspect it would be worth it just to keep from potentially polluting your >> public name on on the interweb. >> >> >> >> -sc >> >> >> >> From: Blackman, Woody [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 3:15 PM >> To: NT System Admin Issues >> Subject: RE: Any insight for me? >> >> >> >> I agree with Sean, unless you have a driving need it is just an extra >> complication. However, I think having the .NET domain is useful to >> differentiate Intra/Extranet services (portals/partners). Low cost with >> high value for providing process design clarity. >> >> >> >> From: Sean Martin [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 12:06 PM >> To: NT System Admin Issues >> Subject: Re: Any insight for me? >> >> >> >> There's no need for a public domain name internally. If you're going to go >> through the trouble of changing it (which I have no personal experience >> with) just use something like .local. >> >> >> >> It sounds like the availability of the public domain name is your driving >> force behind this idea. If you're not experiencing any issues with your >> current configuration, and it's not preventing you from any future changes, >> I'd say leave it alone. >> >> >> >> We operate a split dns environment and it works just fine. >> >> >> >> YMMV >> >> >> >> - Sean >> >> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Kurt Buff <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> All, >> >> I have an interesting situation that has presented a need for a decision: >> >> I work for a medium sized company of around 250 people in three >> countries - US HQ, and much smaller offices in England and Australia. >> >> We have the .com domain for our company, but since joining the firm >> some years ago another company had the .net domain. >> >> I recently checked, and found that the .net domain is for sale - at >> nearly $800.00. That's pretty steep, but I'm considering recommending >> that we get it. >> >> We currently use our .com domain both internally and externally, with >> a split brain DNS, but I wouldn't mind at all using the .net domain >> internally. >> >> I believe that to fully implement the .net domain internally would >> require a domain rename, and we do use Exchange 2003, with a DC and an >> Exchange server in each office (2 DCs in the US office, one >> virtualized.) >> >> So, what are your thoughts on this? How much pain would be involved in >> making such a transition, and do you think it would be worth the >> effort? What (aside from not needing a split-brain DNS) would be the >> benefits, if any? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Kurt >> >> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ >> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
