Being unreasonable?

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
One of my clients has a lot of their IT stuff done by one company, who shall
remain nameless here.  I will refer to them from now on as "the IT co.".

My client has changed the name of their business, and they got the IT co. to
register the new domain name.

The IT co. was going to do the hosting of the site, but they quoted double
what I usually pay for hosting so my client decided to go with my preferred
hosting solution instead (prior to the name change they were hosting the
site themselves but decided not to continue with this).

I also mentioned to the client that I would prefer to use my hosting
provider because I knew that the bespoke CMS system I wrote for them would
"just work".  While it's likely that it would "just work" on the IT co.'s
server as well (I wrote it to be as bog-standard as possible) I didn't want
to take the risk that I'd have to spend lots of time backing-and-forthing
with the IT co. if it didn't.

Now, I wanted the IT co. to transfer the domain name so I could administer
it, for the same reason, to avoid any future backing-and-forthing.  I asked
them for a UDAI and got this response:

"They do NOT need the UDAI number.  They don't require to "take over" your
DNS in order to host you're website.  All they need to do, is, setup and
advise us what IP address to point the www record to."

No need to shout guys.  Sigh.  OK, well, I'm not that fussed.  So I send
them the DNS records:

DNS Primary Server Hostname:
DNS Primary Server IP (Net Address):
DNS Secondary Server Name:
DNS Secondary Server IP (Net Address):

Then I get this:

"We don't normally do that.  I assume this is the crowd that will be hosting
your web site. All they need to do is simple tell us what "A" record or
"CNAME" record to create for the FQDN of

We won't be re-pointing the name servers to the servers listed below.

This isn't rocket science and it's quite common for the web site hosting
company NOT to have the DNS, but simply have an appropriate record pointed
to the website."

My question is, is the IT co. being unreasonable?  Normally I have full
control over the domains I'm administering so I haven't come across this
before.  Does their tone seem to you to be, arrogant and rude?  That's how
they came across to me.  What do you think I should do?  Grin and bear it?
Point it out to the client?

Re: Being unreasonable?

On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 10:04:36 +1300, Nik Coughlin put finger to
keyboard and typed:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

If I was running the IT co, I would respond in exactly the same way as
them. Well, maybe a little more tactfully, but with the same intent.
Far too many web hosting companies try to get hold of the domain name
unnecessarily, often in the expectation that they can later bill the
customer for hosting the DNS as well as the website, or simply because
they're too dumb to understand that it isn't necessary. IT co is
absolutely right, there is no need for the webhost to have full
control of the domain name when a CNAME or A record will suffice.

Also, from their perspective, you have no right to be asking for
control of the domain. If their customer chooses to move control of
the domain away from them, then that's the customer's choice, but it
would be totally wrong of them to surrender control at the request of
a third party. If I was the customer in such a case, I would be
extremely annoyed if my DNS host accepted such a request from my
webhost. If you have written permission from your customer to transfer
the domain, or even just the DNS, then send a copy of that permission
to the DNS host when asking for control, as without it they have no
business letting go of the domain. If you don't have written
permission from your customer to transfer the domain, you have no
business making the request.

-- - read and share comments and opinons
"Take me or leave me, don't have to believe me"

Re: Being unreasonable?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Good point here, Mark. If you have written permission from the client,
then the IT co has no right to say a word. If you don't have written
permission, then they would be amiss in releasing anything to you.

But from the web hosts point of view, while you may not NEED full
domain rights, the fact is that the IT co doesn't need them, either.
The domain belongs to the client so the client can do whatever they
want with it; all either of us can do, really, is advise them. The
question is, which of the two do they trust more, you or the IT co?

- Jason

Re: Being unreasonable?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

IMHO, it's not up to the IT company to decide, it's up to the client.
If the client says do it, then they do it, regardless of whether they
think it's a good idea.

I have had similar problems in the past with hostile negotiations, and
almost always have to send it to the client. Email the client and CC
the IT co, and in the most professional way possible request that the
client give permission to the IT co to transfer the domain to you. If
they still refuse, then it's the client's battle at that point.

In the future, you'll want to get in the habit of CCing ALL emails to
the IT co to the client. I've done this for years, and generally find
that it makes transitions a lot smoother. The IT co probably thinks of
you as a competitor, so making you seem inadequate is great for them;
at the least, they're going to throw a few stumbling blocks your way.

- Jason

Site Timeline