iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on Apr 17, 2019 13:12:59 GMT
What hosting costs? The domain just points to Lendy's website. There is no hosting. Where's the redirect managed? (I've only used htaccess file - if there's another way I'd be keen to learn.)
|
|
sydb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 345 
Likes: 316
|
Post by sydb on Apr 17, 2019 13:45:06 GMT
Some domain sellers allow you to redirect for free through their interface of how you manage your domains. I think there is also a way to change the DNS lookup. Best look on the web; there is lots of info.
|
|
|
|
Post by empyrean on Apr 17, 2019 13:48:45 GMT
What hosting costs? The domain just points to Lendy's website. There is no hosting. Where's the redirect managed? (I've only used htaccess file - if there's another way I'd be keen to learn.) It can be handled at the DNS level by setting a CNAME record (this only allows you to forward one host to another, so there's none of the granularity over URL path, or anything else, that a .htaccess file would provide).
|
|
jontyab
Member of DD Central
Posts: 117
Likes: 79
|
Post by jontyab on Apr 17, 2019 13:55:02 GMT
Where's the redirect managed? (I've only used htaccess file - if there's another way I'd be keen to learn.) It can be handled at the DNS level by setting a CNAME record (this only allows you to forward one host to another, so there's none of the granularity over URL path, or anything else, that a .htaccess file would provide). A CNAME wouldn't immediately redirect to the lendy.co.uk domain though - the browser would still show as having navigated to p2pindependentforum.co.uk with the actual page loading underneath. DNS providers may well provide a service to redirect to a different host, but it's not at the DNS level as I understand it.
|
|
|
|
Post by empyrean on Apr 17, 2019 14:24:52 GMT
It can be handled at the DNS level by setting a CNAME record (this only allows you to forward one host to another, so there's none of the granularity over URL path, or anything else, that a .htaccess file would provide). A CNAME wouldn't immediately redirect to the lendy.co.uk domain though - the browser would still show as having navigated to p2pindependentforum.co.uk with the actual page loading underneath. DNS providers may well provide a service to redirect to a different host, but it's not at the DNS level as I understand it. This is true — sorry, I didn't realise this was what is happening. In this case, I believe (but am not sure) that a 'URL' DNS record can be used to effect a redirect.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,710
Likes: 2,985
Member is Online
|
Post by michaelc on Apr 17, 2019 16:19:54 GMT
From the two queiries below, we can see that there is a single A record for p2pindependentforum.co.uk. That means a fixed IP address. The ip given is one of reg123 servers. That server has been configured to redirect any requests to the urls of the form p2pindependentforum.co.uk to lendy.co.uk. In practice, this just means the person who registered the doman clicked a few buttons on Reg123's user friendly portal and asked them to redirect requests for p2pindependentforum.co.uk One thing I haven't time right now to look at is why niether that domain nor lendy.co.uk supplies owner information on the whois register. Nominet who manage co.uk require companies to provide contact details and anonymous ones are not allowed (for companies). Either this changed in the last couple of years or we could if we have time fill in a simple form over at nominet to tell them that at least lendy.co.uk isn't following the rules and should publish their contact info. Techie stuff below: From nslookup/dig:p2pindependentforum.co.uk. 60 IN A 94.136.40.82 From browser :Request URL: p2pindependentforum.co.uk/Request Method: GET Status Code: 301 Moved Permanently (from disk cache) Remote Address: 94.136.40.82:80 Referrer Policy: no-referrer-when-downgrade Cache-Control: private Content-Length: 0 Content-Type: text/html Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 16:07:56 GMT Location: Lendy.co.uk
Server: Microsoft-IIS/8.5 X-AspNet-Version: 4.0.30319 X-Powered-By: ASP.NET |
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,710
Likes: 2,985
Member is Online
|
Post by michaelc on Apr 17, 2019 16:36:25 GMT
From the two queiries below, we can see that there is a single A record for p2pindependentforum.co.uk. That means a fixed IP address. The ip given is one of reg123 servers. That server has been configured to redirect any requests to the urls of the form p2pindependentforum.co.uk to lendy.co.uk. In practice, this just means the person who registered the doman clicked a few buttons on Reg123's user friendly portal and asked them to redirect requests for p2pindependentforum.co.uk One thing I haven't time right now to look at is why niether that domain nor lendy.co.uk supplies owner information on the whois register. Nominet who manage co.uk require companies to provide contact details and anonymous ones are not allowed (for companies). Either this changed in the last couple of years or we could if we have time fill in a simple form over at nominet to tell them that at least lendy.co.uk isn't following the rules and should publish their contact info.Since GDPR came into force no contact details will show in whois. Take a look at any .co.uk and youll see the contact info is removed. I did a reverse ip look-up on p2pindependentforum.co.uk earlier to see what other websites/domains were hosted on the same server. I couldnt find lendy.co.uk or savingstream.co.uk (which incidentally is returning an error). I dont know what other genius money-making companies LB has domains for so I only looked for lendy.co.uk and savingstream.co.uk . Don't know much about GDPR so will take your word for it - interesting that it applies to companies too. But the reverse IP lookup will give you 94.136.40.82 and if you pop that into a browser you'll see its a server owned by the registrar (reg123).
|
|
jo
Member of DD Central
dead
Posts: 741
Likes: 498
|
Post by jo on Apr 18, 2019 9:24:01 GMT
|
|
greatmarko
Member of DD Central
Posts: 343
Likes: 373
|
Post by greatmarko on Apr 18, 2019 9:34:41 GMT
Wayback Machine will only cache "actual" webpages - not redirects. If there has never been content on p2pindependentforum.co.uk and it has always just been a redirect, this will explain why there are no cached copies of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Apr 18, 2019 9:50:02 GMT
I have some scanned photos on a shipping web site. They mostly date back to the early 1960s and because I had what was then above average photographic equipment, they are popular with people having an historical interest in shipping. By chance, a year or so ago I found a very familiar photo on a web site belonging to a former ship's master, covering the history of P&O. It had been blatantly stolen from the shipping site and used without any acknowledgement to its well documented source and copyright. He could just as easily have contacted me or put a link in to it, as I can see from the shipping site that numerous links have been made to it. Using whois I had been able to find the email address and home address of the web master and thief. Now I can no longer do this, so this level of privacy protection is even better news for thieves than the average user.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,710
Likes: 2,985
Member is Online
|
Post by michaelc on Apr 18, 2019 13:44:12 GMT
Don't know much about GDPR so will take your word for it - interesting that it applies to companies too.But the reverse IP lookup will give you 94.136.40.82 and if you pop that into a browser you'll see its a server owned by the registrar (reg123). Heres a succinct article on the matter: blog.doteasy.com/2018/09/26/domain-privacy-after-gdpr/ . Halfway down the page there is " Domain WHOIS after GDPR" title. Interestingly, the " So, what happens if you need to contact the domain registrant (ie. a domain name dispute)?" may settle our suspicions once and for all! That much I did know and agree with you - a colossal waste of money implementing and time of users hitting the ok button. The second part I didn't and that makes it even worse IMO. Why should a company not have to publish their details considering they are public and even need a plaque at the registered office identifying it? Here is Nominet's interpretation. (They run .co.uk and I think actually all of .uk) registrars.nominet.uk/news/nominet-announcements/gdpr-changes-ukAnyway seem to have gone off topic so won't say any more on this.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Apr 18, 2019 14:49:47 GMT
(They run .co.uk and I think actually all of .uk) As a further aside, p2pindependentforum.uk remains available for registration...
I'm surprised how few organisations have taken the opportunity to shorten their URLs by removing the "co." from their domain names (or the "org." if there was no "co." with the same name etc.).
I predict chaos when domain registrations get opened up after the June deadline and many of the organisations who'd never bothered to exercise their right of registration end up having to fight off a very realistic phishing page that even has what should be a correct URL.
Big names do seem to have at least registered domains that could allow URLs like www.google.uk and www.amazon.uk etc. but they don't seem to be providing any services at those shorter urls (not even DNS resolution).
Several of the p2p organisations still haven't exercised their right of registration (no reason not to leave it til the last allowable moment as long as they're aware I suppose) with domains such as zopa.uk and fundingcircle.uk not registered but still reserved for the owner of the corresponding .co.uk domain.
... and then there's Lendy who've somehow ended up letting some bloke called alan get hold of the domain that should have had its right of registration tied to the lendy.co.uk domain!
|
|
sydb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 345
Likes: 316
|
Post by sydb on Apr 19, 2019 10:45:42 GMT
From a practical point of view, not having whois address info available to all helps preserve privacy. Or shouldn't sole traders have a right to privacy? Larger businesses will be on Companies House and addresses registered there. Legitimate businesses do not mind their customers knowing their address but they don't want bots or criminals picking up their privacy details and exploiting them.
Many things coming out of the EU and our government in recent years has been ill conceived, particularly penalising small businesses. The prohibition of passing on credit card fees to customers using credit cards just shows the power of the banks and big corporates. Soon cash might be gone and every transaction will be electronic. Anti-money laundering privacy information (assuming guilt before innocence) is littered all over the place just waiting to be hacked. All you need is corrupt administration elements and then you can forget about any chance of privacy even without hacking.
sl75 , Are you saying that whoever has a x.co.uk domain can get FREE registration of x.uk or just has first dibs on buying it? If free, why has it not been implemented automatically?
Edit - just checked. Oh, look, £10 per year fee from my domain manager. I'll just add that to all the other costs that were necessitated by expanding domain suffixes that hardly anybody wanted but the domain industry so that everyone with an existing web domain is forced into buying them. There is nothing wrong with a, 'sorry, the website cannot be found' message - the potential customer just had to recheck the URL, discover they made a mistake and type it in properly this time. Talk about exploitation.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Apr 20, 2019 10:38:05 GMT
sl75 , Are you saying that whoever has a x.co.uk domain can get FREE registration of x.uk or just has first dibs on buying it? If free, why has it not been implemented automatically?
Edit - just checked. Oh, look, £10 per year fee from my domain manager. I'll just add that to all the other costs that were necessitated by expanding domain suffixes that hardly anybody wanted but the domain industry so that everyone with an existing web domain is forced into buying them. There is nothing wrong with a, 'sorry, the website cannot be found' message - the potential customer just had to recheck the URL, discover they made a mistake and type it in properly this time. Talk about exploitation. The reservation was free (for the 5 year transition period), and followed a priority order of which of the "conflicting" names in .co.uk, .org.uk, .me.uk, etc. got the reservation based on domains already registered before the 5 year transition period. (p2pindependentforum.co.uk was registered after the start of the period, and so COULD have been registered just as p2pindependentforum.uk initially.
From what I can gather, the long term intention in this case was to REDUCE such costs... as it was intended to transition to a state where most uk websites were just example.uk as is the case in many other countries (on the "old" system it's often encouraged to register the .co.uk even if your main website is .org.uk or .me.uk or similar, so that there's less "confusion" as nobody needs to remember which code goes between example. and .uk.
I think the people most closely involved in the industry expected more people to jump at the opportunity so that websites still using .co.uk would be considered old fashioned and out of touch by now.
The reality seems to be that public consciousness is still very much fixed in the "old" system, and few major websites (even though most of the biggest ones have at least registered the shorter urls) have enabled them even towards the end of the 5 year transition period, and even fewer are actively making their customers aware of the new shorter url.
I'm not sure how much of a barrier the stricter requirements for the .uk namespace compared to the .co.uk namespace might be (requires a uk postal address for the shorter registration, whereas .co.uk was literally open to anyone on the planet), but I'll be fascinated to see whether the lapsing of the free reservations later this year results in a lot of bad press or a lot of good press....
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,025
Likes: 5,152
Member is Online
|
Post by adrianc on Apr 20, 2019 10:52:11 GMT
I'll just add that to all the other costs that were necessitated by expanding domain suffixes that hardly anybody wanted but the domain industry so that everyone with an existing web domain is forced into buying them. There is nothing wrong with a, 'sorry, the website cannot be found' message - the potential customer just had to recheck the URL, discover they made a mistake and type it in properly this time. Talk about exploitation. It's a damn sight cheaper to buy some "unnecessary" domains than to find out you're losing business because somebody registered the one you couldn't be bothered with, whether disgruntled ex-customer or simply opportunistic competitor.
Even a hundred quid or two per year is nowt to any kind of viable business.
|
|
