nfbnet.org
Its Domain Power Rank is moderate.
- Global Rank
- #403,768
▼ 40,649
- Rank in TLD
- #46,182
▼ 5,135
- Referring Domains
- 81
▼ 5
- Avg. Referrer Power Rank
- 31.6
- Subdomains
- 5
- Domain age
- 30 yr 1 mo
Link Overview
- Avg. Referrer Power Rank
- 31.6
- Median Referrer Power Rank
- 24.9
- Referring Domains
- 81
- Linked Domains
- 841
Referring Domains by Power Rank
0–9 5
10–19 18
20–29 24
30–39 13
40–49 8
50–59 3
60–69 4
70–79 4
80–89 1
90–100 1
Total 81
Referring Domains
| Referring domain | Power Rank | Global Rank |
|---|---|---|
| wikipedia.org | 91.8 | #34 |
| w3.org | 88.8 | #62 |
| webaim.org | 76.1 | #1,025 |
| r-project.org | 74.3 | #1,457 |
| uw.edu | 73.4 | #1,780 |
| mo.gov | 72.9 | #1,944 |
| msstate.edu | 65.2 | #7,318 |
| hackaday.com | 64.5 | #8,103 |
| posit.co | 63.0 | #10,218 |
| nfb.org | 61.3 | #13,972 |
Basic Information
- TLD
- .org
- Registration date
- 23 Sept 1996
- Last updated
- 12 Aug 2026
- Expires
- 22 Sept 2027 (321 days remaining)
- Domain statuses
- clientDeleteProhibited clientRenewProhibited clientTransferProhibited clientUpdateProhibited
- Registry
- Public Interest Registry (PIR)
- Registrar
- GoDaddy.com, LLC
Subdomain
ftp.nfbnet.orghost.nfbnet.orgmail.nfbnet.orgwebmail.nfbnet.orgwww.nfbnet.org
DNS
| Type | Name | TTL | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | nfbnet.org | 600 | 69.164.216.131 |
| MX | nfbnet.org | 3600 | 10 nfbnet.org |
| NS | nfbnet.org | 3600 | pdns03.domaincontrol.com |
| NS | nfbnet.org | 3600 | pdns04.domaincontrol.com |
| SOA | nfbnet.org | 3600 | pdns03.domaincontrol.com. david.andrews.nfbnet.org. 2025090800 28800 7200 604800 600 |
| TXT | nfbnet.org | 3600 | v=spf1 +mx +a +ip4:69.164.216.131 ~all |
Email Authentication
- MX
- Valid
- SPF
- Valid
- DMARC
- Warning
DMARC is set to p=none, which does not ask receiving servers to quarantine or reject failing messages.
Some information is cached or comes from our own analysis, so it may not be current or complete. Our link analysis does not cover every link on the web. Metrics are based on our own methodology and should not be taken as definitive assessments of a domain’s or service’s quality or trustworthiness.