If you're only going as high as 1M, the shrouded 4mm sockets you linked should be absolutely fine. You probably (definitely) want to consider 4 terminal Kelvin connection for the 100R and 1k though to eliminate wire and connector resistance..
You will want to use 4W resistance measurements for low value resistors to eliminate the (ill specified) resistance of the test leads, but for that you don't necessarily need four terminals. If you look e.g. at the wiring of the ESI SR104 standard, you'll see that internally the I and P terminals are connected using a fairly short conductor and a much longer then leads to the resistance element(s). That's fine, as the internal wiring isn't changing and those conductors are included in the calibrated value. It's a matter of convenience hence.
TiN is fond of pure copper terminals it seems. I think those are generally too cumbersome (delicate and absolutely requiring cleaning before use) and belong to specialized use cases. Low thermal EMF terminals for the Potential terminals (if there are separate I and P terminals) would be nice, but I think many resistance standards get away without (many better DMMs can separately measure and subtract thermal EMF during resistance measurement and bridges usually offer to reverse the driving current).
EDIT: "convenience" above isn't quite cutting it. If there are exactly two positions for I and P conductors to attach, then it doesn't matter how it's done. If however there's a continuum of positions, then minuscule variations will yield varying results. That's clearly an issue for high precision measurements or low value resistances.