Re: Quad-A records in Network Solutions ?

[james jones <james () freedomnet co nz>]

Not to sound like I am trolling here, but how hard is it get VPS servers or
some EC2 servers and setup your own DNS servers. Are there use cases where
that is not practical?

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Tony Patti <tony () swalter com> wrote:

> No, not $50, NetSol charges me in the range of $9.75 to $9.99 per year per
> domain name.
>
> Not defending NetSol, just clarity for the purposes of the archives.
>
> Who knows, maybe I get those rates because I mention their competitor
> GoDaddy   :-)
>
> Tony Patti
> CIO
> S. Walter Packaging Corp.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Gallagher [mailto:mike () txih com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 8:19 PM
> To: Joseph Snyder
> Cc: nanog () nanog org; Arturo Servin
> Subject: Re: Quad-A records in Network Solutions ?
>
> Doesn't netsol charge something crazy like $50/year per for domain
> services?
> If that is still the case sounds like ipv6 support for 250k is a drop in
> the
> bucket :-). Not sure why any clueful DNS admin would still use netsol
> though.
>
> On Mar 28, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Joseph Snyder <joseph.snyder () gmail com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree, but in a big company it generally would cost at least 10s of
> thousands of dollars just for training alone. The time away from the phones
> that would have to be covered would exceed that. Let's say you had 8000
> phone staff and they were getting $10/be and training took an hour. That is
> 80k coverage expenses alone. For a large company I would expect a project
> budget of at least 250k minimal. And probably more if the company exceeds
> 50,000 employees.
> > Arturo Servin <arturo.servin () gmail com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >    Another reason to not use them.
> >
> >    Seriusly, if they cannot expend some thousands of dollars (because it
> shouldn't be more than that) in "touching code, (hopefully) testing that
> code, deploying it, training customer support staff to answer questions,
> updating documentation, etc." I cannot take them as a serious provider for
> my names..
> > Regards,
> > .as
> >
> > On 28 Mar 2012, at 21:16, John T. Yocum wrote:
> >
> > > On 3/28/2012 12:13 PM, Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo wrote:
> > > > I'm not convinced. What you mention is real, but the code they need
> > > > is little more than a regular expression that can be found on Google
> > > > and a 20-line script for testing lames. And a couple of weeks of
> > > > testing, and I think I'm exaggerating.
> > > >
> > > > If they don't want to offer support for it, they can just put up
> > > > some disclaimer.
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Carlos
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 3/28/12 3:55 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> > > > > On Mar 28, 2012, at 11:47 AM, Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo wrote:
> > > > > > I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories, but, c'mon. For a
> > > > > > provisioning system, an AAAA record is just a fragging string,
> > > > > > just like any other DNS record. How difficult to support can it be ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course it is more than a string. It requires touching code,
> (hopefully) testing that code, deploying it, training customer support
> staff
> to answer questions, updating documentation, etc. Presumably Netsol did the
> cost/benefit analysis and decided the potential increase in revenue
> generated by the vast hordes of people demanding IPv6 (or the potential
> lost
> in revenue as the vast hordes transfer away) didn't justify the expense.
> Simple business decision.
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > -drc
> > >
> > > That's assuming their system is sanely or logically designed. It could
> be
> a total disaster of code, which makes adding such a feature a major pain.
> > > --John