-1

I just moved a simple, static website to GCP, and it's working fine. But I want to keep using a separate company as registrar, not the hosting company. So as a shortcut, I just set the www CNAME at the registrar's site to c.storage.googleapis.com, without using Google's DNS - and this works.

But is it good practice? If not, could someone recommend a step-by-step guide to setting up a public zone on GCP? Google's documentation is complicated, getting into private zones, authentication, and service accounts, which I probably don't need.

Md Zubayer
  • 367
  • 1
  • 7
user3354588
  • 1

1 Answers1

1

As long as the company providing your DNS services is reliable and has the DNS features you require, it really does not matter which DNS provider you use.

You bring up the point of good practice. There are lots of opinions, some prefer that the same cloud provider host DNS, others recommend separating these functions.

There are situations where you want the DNS servers in the same cloud. For example AWS supports A-ALIAS records which are a logical fit for AWS load balancers. Take a look at your current DNS server requirements and look forward to what you may need next year, etc. Then pick a DNS provider that meets your requirements.

It is also very easy today to switch both registrars and DNS providers. It can be a pain for a couple of days while DNS switches over, but this just means hosting your records with two companies while the world synchronizes.

John Hanley
  • 74,467
  • 6
  • 95
  • 159
  • This is helpful. But I want a different company to be registrar since we are now in an era when thousands of accounts every day are shut down in the war against fake news, fraudulent bots, etc. Mostly for good reason I believe, but mistakes are inevitable, and there is no due process or any clear, rapid process for getting them rectified. No serious business or other site can live with the risk of suddenly going away with no recourse or reason why. A workaround is a separate registrar, who doesn't manage the content and is unlikely to shut down the customer, who can then change hosting. – user3354588 Nov 10 '18 at 04:48
  • Why do you think separating the registrar, DNS servers and hosting providers provides you more protection? I only have to hit one of them to take you down. If security is your concern, your approach is not making it better just creating more entry points (three different companies that might be breached or fail to protect you). For your example of being shutdown, if a legal entity takes control of your domain, there is not much that you can do. Most western countries respect court orders from each other. Most companies do not want to tangle with government requests or court orders. – John Hanley Nov 10 '18 at 05:40
  • In the U.S., government taking control of a domain seems to be rare. The First Amendment is supported across the political spectrum, and says Congress shall "make no law" against free speech or press - but not "pressure no company" to restrict information. This whole area of what Web publishers can and should do to resist censorship needs more attention. – user3354588 Nov 13 '18 at 21:22