jssonu0007
New Member
- Impact
- 1
There are no views or sales on my portfolio at all.
There are no views or sales on my portfolio at all.
HiNo, using one nameserver from one parking provider and another nameserver from a different parking provider for the same domain name is generally not advisable nor effective.
Well, in the days before TLS certificates became commonplace, this statement held true.on the contrary, i have done this in the past many times, with high traffic domains.
majority of traffic usually goes to the ns1, but traffic also goes to ns2/ns3 and ns4
for me, it was quick way to test various platforms at same time.
HiSo yes, it might work, but
Hi
on the contrary, i have done this in the past many times, with high traffic domains.
majority of traffic usually goes to the ns1, but traffic also goes to ns2/ns3 and ns4
for me, it was quick way to test various platforms at same time.
imo....
Thanks for this very keen insight. So one concern here is that if enough people try doing this NS mix and match, it could eventually negatively impact the ranking of that website?Well, in the days before TLS certificates became commonplace, this statement held true.
While it might seem tempting to mix and match nameservers from various domain marketplaces, and it might look like it is working (n=1), there are compelling reasons to avoid doing so.
Certificate Generation Issues. The DNS Challenge, commonly used for generating Let’s Encrypt certificates, relies on accurate DNS records. When you combine nameservers from different marketplaces, there’s a significant risk that the generation of Transport Layer Security (TLS) certificates will fail due to inconsistencies or misconfigurations. See https://letsencrypt.org/docs/challenge-types/
TLS Implementation Differences. Some domain marketplaces implement TLS (the protocol that ensures secure communication over the internet), while others do not. When you blend nameservers, you’re essentially mixing TLS-capable and non-TLS-capable components. This can lead to unexpected behavior for visitors, especially with modern browsers that remember TLS capability on a per-website basis. Imagine a scenario where a user (or web crawler) lands on your site, experiences a secure TLS connection, and then returns later only to find that the same page lacks TLS.
So yes, it might work, but it's not technically correct and will cause trouble for visitors, and for the technical infrastructure behind marketplaces, even if you do not notice this yourself.
Well, I didn't touch on that topic in my previous posting above, but my general feeling is that a modern search engine probably won't appreciate it if a website shows different content with each crawler visit. A search engine wants to provide its users with reliable content, which is consistent and helpful.Thanks for this very keen insight. So one concern here is that if enough people try doing this NS mix and match, it could eventually negatively impact the ranking of that website?
So if mixing the NS has potential ranking impacts, does having the ns3 for verification cause any issues as well?Well, I didn't touch on that topic in my previous posting above, but my general feeling is that a modern search engine probably won't appreciate it if a website shows different content with each crawler visit. A search engine wants to provide its users with reliable content, which is consistent and helpful.
Such a third nameserver behaves similarly to the other two nameservers; it provides the same destination IP address of the webserver, and the content of the lander will be exactly the same. The only issue here concerns your privacy. It's easier for others (including lawyers) to map all your domains, because the third verification nameserver contains a unique string that is the same for all your domains. Oh, and there are some corner cases of registrars/registries not accepting the unique third (*.hn, etc) verification nameserver for some ccTLDs.So does having the ns3 for verification cause any issues as well, including potentially affecting ranking?