×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Earthlink Offers Alternate DNS Without "Dead DNS"

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the just-resolve-my-names dept.

136

Joshua Flory writes, "In response to the story about Earthlink and their version of 'Site Finder', I learned today that Earthlink has provided alternate DNS servers that will remain outside of their 'dead DNS' service. However, this is a completely unsupported service, which begs the question, WHY? Everyone can gain access to public DNS servers, or create their own. The point is that people wanted DNS servers supported by EL that do not include this dead DNS service." Sounds like it's time for Earthlink users to check out OpenDNS.com... they make it easy to turn off the bad-URL behavior.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

136 comments

Islamic Clerics declare Fatwa against BLOCKQUOTE (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131013)

MUDRAGISTAN (Reuters) - Islamic Clerics announced today that due to the incapacity of the islamic mind to understand the difference between an opinion and a quotation, henceforth all use of the BLOCKQUOTE tag in HTML shall be met with unyielding and divine retribution.

The BLOCKQUOTE tag, as introduced with the HTML 2.0 specification in 1994, has been used on websites throughout the world to signify that the text contained within is a quotation from an external source. However, due to an inability for islamics to grow the fuck up and understand basic communicative syntax, they now believe it is their holy right to murder anyone they want to just because one person quoted someone else within context.

This antithesis of freedom is a common theme running throughout all islamic interaction with civilised society. Rampaging islamic mobs worldwide have burned effigies of Dave Raggett, creator of HTML, alongside effigies of President Bush and Pope Benedict XVI. Police measures are now in place to put everyone who ever had a Myspace page or Geocities account into hiding.

Inventor of the World Wide Web, Tim Berners-Lee, was unavailable for comment. Which is probably just as well as we don't want to get bombed by the raghead fuckwits just for quoting him.

Re:Islamic Clerics declare Fatwa against BLOCKQUOT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131080)

If I disapprove of muslim extremists, i.e., don't tolerate them, am I just stooping to their level? Possibly even lower?

Get real (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131616)

People want to kill you for no other reason than you are not a Muslim. Your trite little mental gymnastics routine wont stop them from trying.

Re:Islamic Clerics declare Fatwa against BLOCKQUOT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131652)

Pope says muslims violent, muslims claim that is not true and burn and bomb churches in protest.

umm (2, Funny)

Foo2rama (755806) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131018)

Who uses earthlink anymore anyway...

Re:umm (1)

dwiget (947248) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131197)

Umm, me.

I have been an Earthlink customer for over ten years now, been on DSL with them for seven.

Re:umm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131254)

I don't use *Earthlink*, my ISP is WideOpenWest (aka WOW!). But I have to deal with this error anyway. I've made calls to Earthlink, and they said they were neither the parent company of WOW nor is Earthlink-help.net affiliated with them.

Using Spybot, ewido, Ad-Aware, HijackThis, and a few other anti-spyware programs, I find no spyware on my computer, no browser hijacks, but I still get redirected.

It's a shame really, because that's the only time I use "I'm Feeling Lucky".

Re:umm (1)

Intron (870560) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132451)

Earthlink-help.net has address 66.218.65.224

jwhois 66.218.65.224
[Querying whois.arin.net]
[whois.arin.net]

OrgName: Yahoo!
OrgID: YAOO
Address: 701 First Ave
City: Sunnyvale
StateProv: CA
PostalCode: 94089
Country: US

Re:umm (2, Interesting)

LunaticTippy (872397) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131276)

I use earthlink, ever since they bought netcom back in the 90s.

I'm basically happy with it. I get 1.5/256k aDSL for $40, which is pretty pricey but it has flaked out for a total of 1 hour in 4 years. I've learned to avoid calling support, even for billing problems, unless it's worth wasting an hour and getting upset about. That's just never gone well.

Someday I'm going to migrate to a non-ISP-issued email account for good and just hop from cheapest to cheapest.

I miss my netcom shell account, I miss my old email address. It's hard to give that up. There's nothing holding me to earthlink but inertia right now though. I've never used their proprietary software, so my only addiction is to the email address.

They are my only alternative to Time Warner (1)

EVil Lawyer (947367) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131423)

In the part of Manhattan where I live, they are the only alternative to Time Warner for cable modem service. They are a bit cheaper than TW. Unfortunately TW still does all of the "last mile" stuff. I have to go through TW for the installation, billing, equipment, etc. Basically I am just paying for the Earthlink bandwidth. I assume part of my monthly fee goes to TW.

Re:umm (4, Informative)

theodicey (662941) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131772)

I do, as an alternative to supporting AT&T's illegal wiretapping and internet traffic monitoring.

They cost about $2 more a month for DSL + phone + long distance. The cost difference isn't really their fault, the FCC allowed AT&T and the phone monopolies to charge whatever they wanted for line access. But they make it up in other ways, like with 500 minutes of free long distance

Also, Earthlink's DSL service (provided by Covad) is faster than AT&T's was.

EarthLink over TimeWarner Cable Lines! (1)

TheNinjaroach (878876) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132118)

I have a co-worker who saved $5 / mo. by switching his TimeWarner Road Runner account over to Earthlink. In return he was given a faster line speed on the same network (Until Time Warner increased theirs to match) and isn't charged an extra $10/mo. for not being a Time Warner Cable subscriber.

They're the only company in my area that will lease me a Time Warner line for less than what TW would charge me themselves, and I feel good by not cutting those bastards a check.

Re:umm (1)

2gravey (959785) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132167)

I do because they are the only provider of broadband in my neighborhood. Even Qwest, who owns my phoneline, claims they can't give me DSL. How Earthlink does it (on that same phone line) is a mystery to me. Anyway the speed is decent, the price is good, and I only have to battle customer service for randomly changing my rate every few months or so.

I tried to use Earthlink (2, Interesting)

beaverfever (584714) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132972)

Years ago I tried to get Earthlink DSL service. I called and was told DSL was available at my house. My account is set up and the Earthlink person tells me they'd send me a package and then arrange for installation. Time passes and I don't receive the package. More time passes and I phone: I'm told that DSL is not available in my neighbourhood and so the package and my account was cancelled.

When I ask if perhaps Earthlink could have contacted me to tell me this a couple weeks earlier, the person on the phone tells me (without any hint of humour or irony) that I was sent an email. I never received an email. Yes, we sent an email. To which address I ask. They sent the email telling me that I could not have Earthlink service to the free Earthilink email address they had provided with my account. Super-Genius!

That may have been the stupidest customer service experience of my life and has forever tainted my opinion of anything having to do with Earhtlink.

earthlink is dumbest!!1! :P !!

There isn't a sign saying DNS... (3, Funny)

Rotund Prickpull (818980) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131031)

... because storing dead niggers ain't my fucking business!

Re:There isn't a sign saying DNS... (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131736)

Mods, that's a Pulp Fiction quote... this is not a GNAA troll.

Thanks, I'll never be able to read about DNS without thinking of that scene now... maybe you are a troll? You've definitely seen the movie too many times. :)

OpenDNS doesn't work for everyone (1)

Yonder Way (603108) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131071)

I tried going the OpenDNS route. It broke the anti-spam blacklist rules I had in my Postfix config (which of course is entirely DNS-based). Using any other public DNS server it works fine.

Re:OpenDNS doesn't work for everyone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131223)

I was curious, so I looked at the OpenDNS FAQ...

Does OpenDNS track where I go on the Internet or store data about my usage?

No. OpenDNS does not track where you go or what you do on the Internet, unless you ask us to. OpenDNS stores the following data by default:

        * which domain names were requested at what time
        * which requests OpenDNS was unable to resolve
        * for more details, please read the OpenDNS Privacy Policy

I found this hilarious. They answer saying they "do not track where you go," then in the next sentence tell you that they do track where you go.

Re:OpenDNS doesn't work for everyone (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131428)

I don't know, but maybe their default is to track which domain names were requested, but not by whom? After all, if they really don't keep records of who requested the domain name, there wouldn't be a privacy concern.

I have no reason to believe that what I just said is the case, but it's one obvious way that you could reconcile the two statements.

Re:OpenDNS doesn't work for everyone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131920)

That's what I thought at first, but their privacy policy has more info.

OpenDNS runs Domain Name System (DNS) services. DNS translates the name (e.g., www.example.com) you type in into the corresponding numerical address (e.g., 192.0.34.166) and gets you to the place you want to go. OpenDNS's DNS service collects non-personally-identifying information such as the date and time of each DNS request and the domain name requested.

OpenDNS also collects potentially personally-identifying information like Internet Protocol (IP) addresses of website visitors and IP addresses from which DNS requests are made. For its DNS services, OpenDNS is storing IP addresses temporarily to monitor and improve our quality of service.


So it sounds like they do store the IP address of DNS requests, "temporarily." They don't seem to say anywhere what "temporarily" means, so it could be 2 hours or 2 years. There's also the question of backups. Since they are storing the data at all, they may well be keeping backups. Are those destroyed regularly? I have no idea.

Re:OpenDNS doesn't work for everyone (1)

davidu (18) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132045)

Hi,

We can't really build a profile on you.

Think about it: we don't even see the full URLs you visit. Consider software like the Google toolbar, yahool toolbar and stumbleupon. In fact, think of any toolbar product, including alexa and netcraft. They're all in much better positions to build profiles than we are.

Just, you know, pointing that out. :-)

-david

Re:OpenDNS doesn't work for everyone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16132446)

I agree, they are definitely in much better positions to track users, and even that doesn't compare to the tracking abilities of ISPs themselves. However, I think it's a little underhanded to answer the FAQ question, "No. OpenDNS does not track where you go or what you do on the Internet, unless you ask us to." -- since that's not really true. It may not track the precise URLs, but it does track the requested domains (in a way which is either stored with the requesting IP, or which can be easily correlated with the requesting IP). This is a significant source of information about a person.

The site's privacy policy is also, like most sites' privacy policies, disingenuous. It claims that "Your privacy is critically important to us." Yet, if this were truly the case, IP addresses of requests wouldn't be logged at all. It would be more honest to say that "Your privacy is more important to us than it is to most companies."

I'm not accusing OpenDNS of building profiles of its users. The company may well be much better than most at handling users' information. Nonetheless, a company that was truly focused on privacy would go out of its way to avoid collecting the information in the first place. This could be handled either by never storing the information, or by storing it only with one-way hashing of IPs (using an algorithm with medium or high likelihood of hash collisions). With such hashing, you would lose a little accuracy in your statistics, but would ensure privacy.

Re:OpenDNS doesn't work for everyone (2, Insightful)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131324)

I have Earthlink, sad as it is. I chose it when I got cable because I had them for Sprint DSL and their news servers were very good for free. Then they changed them and they suck now. I'd change to roadrunner, but every change I make is a 2 week interruption in service no matter what change I make, so I refuse to change anything.

I almost made that mistake of using OpenDNS as well. I used Level 3's servers instead.

Re:OpenDNS doesn't work for everyone (3, Informative)

pixr99 (560799) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131553)

FYI, a few weeks back, David Ulevitch blogged that this is no longer a problem [opendns.com].

Re:OpenDNS doesn't work for everyone (1)

pe1chl (90186) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132123)

This "solution" looks rather limited to me. It will probably still break on URIBL lookups.

Re:OpenDNS doesn't work for everyone (1)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132556)

It also breaks email, just like the old SiteFinder did.

eg. I just sucessfully sent an email to eguhrguh@rgherhithg.cm - something that my mailer would normally have picked up, and if not then the email server beyond it.

It's based on the same fallacy that sitefinder was - that the world is the web. Never mind email, ftp, ssh, sip, etc. etc.

Re:OpenDNS doesn't work for everyone (1)

antdude (79039) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131904)

What else is a disadvantage when using OpenDNS? I haven't noticed anything odd when using it for the past two(?) weeks.

But wait! (4, Insightful)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131091)

I thought Earthlink Engineers were so amazingly intelligent that they said that their Dead DNS would only affect Web traffic.

Oh wait, no they're not. They *still* dont get what's wrong with what they're doing.

Re:But wait! (1)

C-Shalom (969608) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131126)

It was the Mindspring engineers that were brilliant. When they merged with Earthlink they "laid off" all the good people.

Re:But wait! (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16132146)

Most of the engineers didn't know this was being done until it was far too late, and they aren't happy about it. And even if they had, it's doubtful it would have made a difference to the folks looking to make some money. So as an engineer distressed by this whole idea, you have two choices:

1. Make a fuss and become a potential target.
2. Complain amongst friends, and pray for a PR disaster that gets it shut down.

I think the bulk have opted for door #2.

IT DOES NOT BEG THE QUESTION. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131092)

It might raise the question, but it certainly does not beg the question. [wikipedia.org]

Re:IT DOES NOT BEG THE QUESTION. (0)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131147)

Yes it does [wikipedia.org]. (From your own link). Languages evolve.

Have a Troll Cookie!

Re:IT DOES NOT BEG THE QUESTION. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131211)

Languages evolve.

Yeah, by mutation. In this case, into Engrish. But that's ok as long as the majority doesn't mind. Who reads Shakespeare in Old English nowadays anyway? Heck, who reads Shakespeare at all nowadays?

Nucular (0, Troll)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131269)

You know, pronouncing nuclear as nucular is still wrong, even if everyone does it.

wait wait wait.... (2, Funny)

numbski (515011) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131429)

You mean George W. Bush is *wrong* about something.

Someone get me a glass of water. I think I'm going to faint and fall off of my segway!

Do You Say Wed-Ness-Day? (2, Funny)

finiteSet (834891) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131451)

You know, pronouncing nuclear as nucular is still wrong, even if everyone does it.
Dammit man, I cannot understand this "modern English" garbage language you are speaking in. I don't care if everyone uses modern English today - Proto-Indo-European [wikipedia.org] is still the true tongue and every word you speak is a crime against language purity. Oh yeah, and get off my lawn!

Re:Do You Say Wed-Ness-Day? (1)

beckerist (985855) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132918)

Who creas? As lnog as you can utdrnesand one atehnor, why do we hvae to be so aanl aoubt the senlplig, let anloe wrod odrer or uagse? You got the pniot of waht tehy wree tnyirg to say, rihgt? Sotp yuor bintihcg!

Re:Nucular (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131474)

Jimmy carter pronounced it "nookler", and he was a nookler engineer.

Re:Nucular (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131480)

The use of "does" in this sentence is still wrong even if everyone does it.

Re:IT DOES NOT BEG THE QUESTION. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131273)

That's rediculous!

Re:IT DOES NOT BEG THE QUESTION. (1)

LEgregius (550408) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131406)

The interesting thing about the phrase is that both the accepted and modern commonly used version can easily be distinguished from each other. That is, the original version is an adjective that could easily be replace with "sucks": "Your argument begs the question." The newer "incorrect" version is followed by a question, which seems more natural given the english words used. I personally find misusing it a bit irritating, but the original phase in actually sort of a bad literal translation from latin. If I had lived in the time when the phrase was translated, I would probably have even more irritated at the translation that I am at people using the phrase to mean something else. We should also keep in mind that it's a PHRASE, not a single word. The WORDS in the phrase could easily mean the "incorrect" meaning, but have to be a bit twisted to mean the original one.


But I'm rambling...

No, it does not "beg the question", it raises it. (1)

Gary W. Longsine (124661) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131408)

Although this phrase is quite commonly misused, there is a difference between language evolution, and willful propagation of ignorance.

Re:No, it does not "beg the question", it raises i (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131540)

What about an ignorant propogation of ignorance?
I imagine that is the much more likely scenario, rather than the unlikely one: someone researches the proper use of the phrase "begging the question," then continues using it improperly, willfully.

Re:No, it does not "beg the question", it raises i (2, Interesting)

bill_kress (99356) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131825)

What about an ignorant propogation[sic] of ignorance?
I imagine that is the much more likely scenario, rather than the unlikely one: someone researches the proper use of the phrase "begging the question," then continues using it improperly, willfully.

The latter would be an informed propagation of ignorance. Well, no, it's no longer ignorance since the phrase makes much more sense in the newer usage.

Perhaps we could call it an informed, willful attempt to patch a critically broken language.
---
On the other hand I have recently come across quite a few truly tragic turns of phrase like "For all intensive purposes.", that one is everywhere--just google for it.

My wife knows someone who says "I'd just assume not" and she's been trying to decide if she should correct him--I thought was a cute fluke, nobody would actually say that! Of course then I start noticing it in other places--last night I saw "I'd just assume not" in the documentation for a linux distro (freespire).

Then there was the training video at prior company where the guy kept saying "Per Se" (or the new written version "Per Say") in the same way most people insert "and" or "Uh" while speaking. "This variable is for regulating the speed per se, this other one is for timing..."

We are now in a world where most text that actually gets read is generated by people without language training of any sort (like myself).

Just give in, trying to correct this exponentially expanding pile of errors we call the internet is just "Tilling at Windmills" (Google it)

Re:IT DOES NOT BEG THE QUESTION. (1)

Craig Davison (37723) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131641)

So now we've resigned ourselves to having no way of describing an argument actually "begging the question"? That doesn't sound like the language evolving to me.

Re:IT DOES NOT BEG THE QUESTION. (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131945)

Ummmm, "you're avoiding the question", "you're dodging the question", "you're not answering the question", "you're making a circular argument", "your logic is circular"... These days, saying "you beg the question" makes you sound uptight and old fashioned. In fact, I have a hard time saying it without feigning a Haaaavaaaad type accent, or at least upper-crusty British. Just picture it:

Christian Fundie: "God made man, right? Therefore, Man cannot have invented God!"
Thinking person: "You beg the question..."
Christian Fundie: "What question?"

Re:IT DOES NOT BEG THE QUESTION. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131775)

Languages evolve.

Naturalment! Fig newton in a blender, fishbowl! But when you garble-zargle warble zous, igfrentic zlendish comprende nonsumus totem.

And when you don't, people can actually understand what you mean.

Re:IT DOES NOT BEG THE QUESTION. (1)

hokeyru (749540) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131921)

Evolution isn't nescessarily a good thing. I, for one, would like my gills back.

Re:IT DOES NOT BEG THE QUESTION. (1)

ricosalomar (630386) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131844)

AC is right. "Begs the Question" is incorrectly overused by people trying to sound smart. Other stupid people think they do.

Re:IT DOES NOT BEG THE QUESTION. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16132171)

"Begs the Question" is incorrectly overused by people trying to sound smart. Other stupid people think they do.
Did you ever stop to consider that perhaps it is the knee-jerk grammar-nazis - who just cannot seem to grasp the concept of language evolution and who shout declarations of How It Must Be - are the ones "trying to sound smart." Meanwhile, the original poster set out to communicate an idea to the readers - damn near all of us understood it, if you didn't, perhaps you should reconsider who you call the "stupid people."

Re:IT DOES NOT BEG THE QUESTION. (1)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132822)

Meanwhile, the original poster set out to communicate an idea to the readers - damn near all of us understood it, if you didn't, perhaps you should reconsider who you call the "stupid people."

He did indeed communicate the idea he set out to communicate. He could have communicated it more effectively and clearly had he used not used the phrase "begs the question" improperly. (Where "proper" is determined by usage of well-educated native speakers with an interest in language.)

He also - inadvertently - communicated that his command of written English has gaps. (As, certainly, does mine.) On /., that doesn't matter much, other than that we then get to go off on tangents about language. In other contexts, it does matter, and proper use of the "prestige dialect" can be useful.

Faster refinement of Clay (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131210)

Now that I've got some pretty strong "modeling or sculpting" clay from the 15 foot hole in the yard (I can make a 12"x1" rod and swing it around without the rod breaking), is there a faster/more efficient way to refine the dirt from the hole into clay than what I'm doing now?

In particular, I first lift the dirt from the bottom of the hole. Then I mix it with the water from the hole that the water pump is pumping out of the hole in a bucket, and remove the large rocks by hand (those break the filter). I then pour the dirt/water mix through a "mosquito netting" screen, into another bucket. This removes the smaller rocks. Then from the bucket, I pour the water into a large cooking pot, leaving the sand-like sediment in the bucket. Then I boil the water until it all evaporates, leaving squishy, stretchy clay. (Incidentally, I bake the clay in the microwave oven on 'high' for a few minutes...does this cook glaze too?) Is there a faster or more efficient way to do this, prefereably without heavy machinery? This kind of clay sells for ~ $10 / pound, but it takes all day to make a few pounds, and it's always dirt colored. Is there a way to make it colors other than brown, as the clay in the stores is? (Short of removing the dirt from around the hole) The clay is the right colors in the earth, gray, red, tan, etc, but somehow dirt gets mixed in. Finally is there a trick to getting something large to not crack when cooked? I'm going to try sun-baking the clay, to see if it cracks less, but cracking is a big issue for me, especially when I try to make thicker, stronger items from clay.

Re:Faster refinement of Clay (1)

Real1tyCzech (997498) | more than 7 years ago | (#16133020)

Have you tried adding food coloring? Simple solution, and may affect the quality, but it's worth a shot.

It does not "beg the question." (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131252)

Don't use phrases if you don't know what they mean.

thxkbye

Re:It does not "beg the question." (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16132106)

I think we need to start getting a troll: grammer nazi flag to set, i'm tired of over half of the comments being "you spelld it wrng n00b!"

OpenDNS is no better (4, Informative)

sidb (530400) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131283)

OpenDNS is not a solution to this problem those with dynamic IPs, which includes most Earthlink customers (like me). By default, they do exactly the same thing Earthlink does: from their webpage [opendns.com]: "...when we can't fix your typo we take you to a page with a set of search results." They do allow you to turn that behavior off on their prefs page [opendns.com], but only if you have a static IP. And I somehow doubt that there isn't a speed hit going off your ISPs own network for all your DNS queries, anyway.

The correct solution, of course, is to ditch Earthlink. Or in my case, not renew with them the next time I change my service -- unfortunately, changing now would be expensive. Until then, I'm going with Earthlink's secret, unbroken servers over OpenDNS.

Re:OpenDNS is no better (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131514)

OpenDNS is not a solution to this problem those with dynamic IPs, which includes most Earthlink customers (like me). By default, they do exactly the same thing Earthlink does: from their webpage: "...when we can't fix your typo we take you to a page with a set of search results." They do allow you to turn that behavior off on their prefs page, but only if you have a static IP.

Actually, AFAIK, there isn't a way to turn off the "search results" page. If you look for a domain that doesn't exist, it directs you to this page no matter what. The option that you can disable is the "typo protection", which will look for other domains which are close to what you typed.

So if you have typo protection enabled, and you type googl.ecom, it figures out that you meant google.com and directs you there. If it can't figure out the domain you intended, it sends you to their search page. If you disable the typo correction, then it just sends you to the search page immediately.

The problem is the search pages (2, Interesting)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131964)

I don't think what you're talking about is a solution -- the behavior that's not wanted by a lot of people, is the redirection to the search page, period.

I.e., what's desired is if you type in a bad address, you get a "domain name not found" error, not a search page.

Those search pages are called a "feature" to some, but to many people -- myself included -- they're just unwelcome advertising and an obnoxious waste of bandwidth.

Re:The problem is the search pages (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132520)

I know, I'm not saying the "search pages" are a feature. The person I responding to claimed you could turn off the search pages, and I was saying that AFAIK, you can't. Read one of the other responses and it seems to be someone from OpenDNS claiming that you can, in fact, disable the search pages, but when I tried it, it didn't work.

That's all. I'm not saying you should use the service or not. Just OpenDNS says you can disable the search pages, and it didn't work for me.

Re:OpenDNS is no better (3, Informative)

davidu (18) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132214)


 
So if you have typo protection enabled, and you type googl.ecom, it figures out that you meant google.com and directs you there. If it can't figure out the domain you intended, it sends you to their search page. If you disable the typo correction, then it just sends you to the search page immediately.


That is absolutely false. If you disable typo correction you will never see the search page. The search page is intended to help users so if you turn off typo correction, you turn off that page. That's okay with us. You will see NXDOMAIN (RCODE=3) responses from our server. Like I've pointed out before, we're technologists and we're building functional and interoperable stuff here.

Not to toot my horn or get all "Slashdot's lame" on this thread but I've been here a long time and it's clear to me that most of the users who posted on slashdot when we launched didn't even read our site or understand what it is that we're doing. Can we not make that mistake again?
 
We're putting control and choice into users hands where there was none before. It's a fact of life that ISPs are doing this. They should be working with us, just like users are. We look at this as giving you a dashboard and all the knobs and buttons you need to manage DNS. DNS is the root (no pun intended) of a ton of applications and services so why wouldn't you want to manage it just like you would a firewall or anti-spam service?

Best,
David

Re:OpenDNS is no better (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132445)

Ummm... I'm sorry if I upset you, but I didn't just go posting things without checking. I use the service and have typo-correction turned off. When I enter an invalid domain name, I get the search page. I don't know what to tell you.

Re:OpenDNS is no better (1)

davidu (18) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132588)

Did you wait a few minutes before checking?

Certainly sounds odd to me.

-david

Re:OpenDNS is no better (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132698)

I tried it, waited about 15 minutes, tried again. Same thing. I don't know what's up, I just assumed it was because you wanted the ad revenue, since that's where you make your money.

Re:OpenDNS is no better (1)

davidu (18) | more than 7 years ago | (#16133034)

We want users to have the best experience possible.

If we did something like this we wouldn't have any users.

We just tested some stuff here and it works. Happy to diagnose with you offline if you'd like. ceo [at] opendns.com

-david

Re:OpenDNS is no better (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132219)

Typo correction is an awfull feature, it encourages people to make such typos...
When these people then go to a machine without such a feature, it will hinder them greatly.
Aside from the fact that most common mis-spellings of popular domains have already been registered by scam artists anyway.

Re:OpenDNS is no better (1)

symbolic (11752) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132533)

I thought this is exactly what Verisign tried to do...dork with DNS results so that it wasn't clear *what* was going on. And of course, that also gives them a chance to ply their users with all kinds of ads. So, it seems they're simply replacing one type of nastiness with another. The only saving grace is that at least users have a choice, whereas Verisign's actions were more or less a mandate thrust upon the community at large.

Re:OpenDNS is no better (2, Informative)

davidu (18) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131980)

Hey all,

I, with some other highly-clued folks, run OpenDNS -- maybe I can help answer some questions. We're going to be rolling out some code at the beginning of October to deal with dynamic IPs. I think you'll find it elite.

Ping me an email at ceo [at] opendns.com if you want to help us beta test.

I'm happy to answer other questions too, as most of you know. :-)

Best,

-david

Re:OpenDNS is no better (1)

Luyseyal (3154) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132603)

Yeah, and despite what they say, I still got 404s on perfectly legitimate URLs. I'm not sure if the target sites blocked them on purpose or what, but it was very noticeable. I had to set DNS back to AT&T to get all my URLs to work.

Sorry, I don't have any specific URLs I can point out. This was a few months ago.
-l

Less savy people will not know (3, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131346)

Who knows OpenDNS? Who knows of the alternatives? You do, I do, Joe Average doesn't. Ya know, the internet and a lotta tubes...

Why do you think AOL is still in business? If people knew about their options, a lot of the large providers would go out of biz.

Re:Less savy people will not know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131659)

Or you can just run your own DNS caching service locally.

editors (1)

minus_273 (174041) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131356)

"which begs the question, WHY?"

i dont think that begs the question at all. Slashdot so called editors strike a gain.

Re:editors (1)

Mr Z (6791) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131596)

Which question is it begging, and what is it begging of that question? Enquiring minds want to know!

And to those of you who say "language evolves:" Keep in mind that the phrase "{beg|begs|begging} the question" derives from the realm of formal logic. People who didn't really understand at all what they were saying used the phrase, thinking it meant "{raise|raises|raising} the question," but really they were just saying it to try to sound smart, without actually being smart. In other words, it's the mark of a poseur.

Compare this to skript kiddiez who mangle computer terminology in an attempt to sound like they know something. Do you really want to encourage that sort of lameness?

All right then. "Raise the question" it is.

--Joe

Dead DNS? (1)

DeadCatX2 (950953) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131371)

Okay. The words "Dead DNS" are in quotations. Obviously this isn't common parlance.

Can I get a definition? Please? Pretty please, with sugar on top, clean the fucking car?

Re:Dead DNS? (1)

0racle (667029) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131472)

Your fingers broken and you can't type google into your address bar?

Uh... (2)

DeadCatX2 (950953) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131536)

Regardless of my ability to research the definition of "Dead DNS" on my own (and I think I actually succeeded, thanks), I thought perhaps it would be useful to save other slashdotters the effort of hammering Google's servers to figure it out, by doing the following

1) Post a question asking what "Dead DNS" is
2) Get a response
3) Watch that person's response get modded up
4) ...
5) PROFIT!

Let me guess - your fingers are broken and you couldn't look it up, either? Or were you just trying to insult me?

Re:Dead DNS? -Answer (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131787)

This is what Earthlink calls their service that returns a search page for your NX domain lookups. If you read either of the blogs linked in the article, you would find that out yourself.

There's nothing open about OpenDNS! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131383)

If you want to make a business out of providing DNS service, fine, go ahead. But please be honest about it. OpenDNS is not open and it isn't pure DNS either. People should boycot them for that opportunistic and dishonest name alone.

What's the catch? (1)

nbritton (823086) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131453)

What's the business model for OpenDNS, how do they make money?

Re:What's the catch? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16131564)

Same way the change bank does.

Volume.

(old SNL reference, but one of my favorites.)

That's funny (3, Insightful)

deinol (210478) | more than 7 years ago | (#16131529)

Sounds like it's time for Earthlink users to check out OpenDNS.com... they make it easy to turn off the bad-URL behavior.

Strange, it sounds to me like it's time for Earthlink users to find a new provider. I know sometimes there are very few options for broadband in an area, but last I checked there were plenty of dialup companies still competing and about.

No, it doesn't (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16132055)

...service, which begs the question, WHY?

Actually, it raises the question.

Ehhh... (1)

Guppy06 (410832) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132119)

As far as I'm concerned, these DNS servers are a fine stopgap solution until I finish switching to a new ISP.

But as for using "OpenDNS," my main objection is that I'm already paying for a DNS server with the cost of my subscription!. Why should I have to jury-rig this work-around, one that is only marginally less distasteful than earthlink-help.net, when I should be getting the Real Thing(TM) with the cost of my subscription (with support, thankyouverymuch)?

The only reason I'm still here is that my parents are using my account as well. And that will be fixed when I visit them for Thanksgiving.

Ditched EL and still get their CR*P (1)

put_the_cat_out (961909) | more than 7 years ago | (#16132412)

I ditched eartlhink early this year and started using Verizon's FIOS service. For some bizarre reason I can't figure out, I am still being directed to earthlink's DNS servers and getting their trash loaded when a page can't be found.

Even worse, I have discovered it breaks a nice feature that I particularly like with safari (yes, I use mac os x). Safari's autocomplete feature apparently relied upon the standard dead page error and attempted to fill in the "www." and ".com", ".org", or ".net" to find a valid page. Now with earthlink's new DNS "feature", safari's auto complete won't work properly.

How many times can earthlink screw me over by one lousy, unwanted "feature"?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...