this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2026
46 points (96.0% liked)

Selfhosted

62521 readers
344 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] maxwellfire@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I believe most (all?) registrars should let you give them a global DNS server, at which point your domain should be resolvable globally. Whether it's reachable isn't at the registration level, it's at the DNS level. The blog author's comment confuses me. Maybe they mean like having a TLD that matches each country with users? Seems not worth it.

You can get a domain for like $10 a year from many places. The national registrar I looked up was like $7 a year (Brazil).

[–] Hal@piefed.nz 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I thought the implication was that you may only be able to buy from that registrar if you're from/in that country?

[–] maxwellfire@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Yeah, I think that's right, but where your clients are is irrelevant. That's what confused me about the author's statement.

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago

Ah yeah, that makes more sense, thanks!