HughesNet Satellite → Increasing Internet Speed by DNS Hacking

Not sure how many of you guys no this, Im sure most however I just found this and have been trying for the day. It seems to make an improvement. It seems that I transition quicker between home pages. Any way here it is if you are interested.

»www.computerworld.com/ac ··· =9019951

I've just been using it for a few minutes and it does seem to be a little snappier. I tried the regedit thing but it to delete it. It cause my system to crash.

I tried OpenDNS last year and found that it does NOT work with HughesNet. I do also have a HOSTS file with frequently visited IPs in there--can't honestly say I've noticed a change. It was created by (I think) accelerweb, but then I had problems with THAT and un-installed it.

The NegativeCacheTime hack seems to make sense; I have put that into my Registry and will be interested to see if it makes any impact.

I tried it and I don't see a difference.
I also found this »blog.opendns.com/2006/10 ··· is-time/

No big loss you guys can't use open DNS. While the service OpenDNS provides is good, free, etc etc. I find it's faster on DSL to use the big east coast open servers if you live anywhere east of the Mississippi or there about.

They have been mentioned many times here before and they are

4.2.2.1
4.2.2.2
4.2.2.3
4.2.2.4

I used to use them on my DW6000 and DW7000 and they seemed to help stop me from having page not founds, so I am not sure what that blog meant that you can't use them on Hughes.net, but they may have changed things.

???? Unless I used OpenDNS on the wrong ethernet port on my computer, I think I got a fantastic improvement. Web pages seem to be loading faster for me. Most importantly, the web acceleration errors I frequently get have disappeared (I may have gotten one of those errors, but the page was probably cached. A quick refresh fixed it.)

Edit: Okay, maybe not so great. I seem to still get some web acceleration errors. BTW, WTF IS THE DEAL HUGHESNET? Stupid web acceleration errors.

Regarding OpenDNS:

said by "piggie" :

---

I used to use them

---

said by "Total Obliv" :

---

I got a fantastic improvement.

---

I had tried it some months ago and couldn't get it to work no how no way, and then found on the OpenDNS site that it WOULDN'T work, so felt kinda silly about having tried it. I wonder if the person who mentioned it here originally (long ago) either wasn't using Direcway/Hughesnet or was just speculating about alternate DNSes.

Until someone shows me how--I say "OpenDNS doesn't work".

If you use Firefox for your browser, you can add the Fasterfox extension that adds a DNS cache. The default experation is 3600 secs for the cache, but changing it to 36000 in the Custom settings helped a lot. That way it stores DNS lookups for 10 hours so if a site changes it's IP address, you won't lose it for good.

When you use a DNS cache and a site changes address, you can't load the page until it looks up the DNS address again.

Start with the Turbocharged settings first in Fasterfox, then change to Custom and increase the DNS cache setting.

For the IE users, there is a FREE version of Tweakmaster that has a DNS accelerator in in. It will capture the DNS entries from IE and automatically build your host file.

It's compatible with VISTA, if that's important.

You can optimize for dialup and change the settings somewhat for hughes. I use 64,240 for the Receive Window, 128 for TTL and MTU of 1500 for the Network Adapters.

It does help.

»www.tweakmaster.com/

Doesn't capture DNS for Firefox ... as mentioned you need Fasterfox for that

Snowman

What about OpenDNS doesn't work? I've been using OpenDNS servers as my secondary servers for over a year now, and am very happy with the performance. My primary server resides on my router courtesy of DNS Masq and DD-WRT, but that server ultimately had to "learn" from my OpenDNS servers. I haven't used a Hughes DNS server in a long time. I started using OpenDNS before I had a static IP, so I know that's not the key to its working.

I also run FasterFox and while it seems to make browsing snappier, the benefit I see from OpenDNS (and running a local server) is a dramatic reduction in DNS errors (Page Cannot Be Displayed, etc.).

Boy if you got it working congratulations to you. As I recall I could never get that OpenDNS page to work, the one that says "yep you've got it configured right"--then I found the statement fromt the site itself that it doesn't work w/HNS and I gave-up.

Gonna take a look at tweakmaster next.

Well Tell us how you made it work.

He did- "My primary server resides on my router courtesy of DNS Masq and DD-WRT, but that server ultimately had to "learn" from my OpenDNS servers"

He has the router setup as a DNS server.

Wired/Wireless Network w/ Modded Linksys WRT54GS v.2 w/ DD-WRT

Dnsmasq
»thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmas ··· doc.html

DD-WRT
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DD-WRT

I didn't do anything out of the ordinary. The computers on my network are set to DHCP. I use DD-WRT on my router, and let DNS Masq act as my Local (and Primary) DNS server. DNS Masq is also my DHCP server. I have DNS Masq set to hand out static DHCP addresses to to the network computers.

Basic router setup is pictured in the attached screen shot...Static WAN IP, DNS Masq is automatically set as my first DNS server, and OpenDNS servers set as numbers 2 and 3 (even though they're 1 and 2 on setup...DNS Masq overrides and becomes #1). I am signed up with OpenDNS, but I don't think that makes a hoot. I've always had things set up pretty much like this, even when I had a non-routable IP. In that case, my WAN was set to DHCP instead of Static.....that's it. It works very well. Obviously if I request an address that DNS Masq hasn't learned yet, I go looking with OpenDNS servers, who not only send me where I want to go, they teach DNS Masq about that page for future reference. I'm not real sure why it's not working for others, cuz I've done nothing special. Maybe it's just my good looks and charm that gets me by. We can't explain why I can use Shareaza and others can't, either. Who knows??!!??

I have Tweakmaster installed and I like how it manages my hosts file--haven't tried your other settings yet though.

It does NOT appear to be free, however; despite that their website says "no purchase necessary" you have to buy or sign-up for something from TrialPay... Does anyone know, does this thing expire/is crippled after the 30 day "evaluation" is up?

»www.tweakmaster.com/download.php

You want the standard version, which they clearly say is free, no purchase necessary on the above link. It's a bit confusing between pro and standard in selecting the downloads.

I just downloaded a copy of the install file from the above link without getting asked for anything.

It does not have a couple of the features of pro version, which I have. That's Linkfox for IE (basically a proxy server I think) and the DU meter (download / upload meter to measure your speeds continuously and will run a daily total), but only for your computer. I have the pro version, do not use linkfox, but do use the DU meter.

All other features, including the DNS Accelerator are in the free version, which they used to charge for.

They may prompt you to buy the pro features after 30 days, but I think you can just say no and it will continue working.

Snowman

*****

Oooops, I guess you do have to go through the checkout to get a free license (probably after the 30 days), but the cost shows as 0.00

Follow the link at the top of the page.

»www.tweakmaster.com/register.php

Well, actually you HAVE TO GO THRU TRIALPAY to get the license, and you CAN'T get thru that process without signing-up for or buying something with one of its sponsors.

Prolly worth it to find something to buy w/TrialPay to get the "free" license, but I might just wait-out the 30-day TM trial and see what happens.

In the meantime if anybody here sees how to get it "scot-free" by all means tell us! It DOES look like a very nice tool...

Just a note to thank you snowman for this tip. I'm not obsessive/compulsive about HN speeds or operation, but it does seem that since implementing at least the DNS accelerator function of tweakmaster our surfing has been faster, with fewer "page not found". I've just now made your other setting changes and will likely keep TM on my computers from now on. Thanks again!

I'm a bit skeptical as to just how you quantify " It does help ". Just for drill, take a peek at »Satellite Forum FAQ »Can I Tweak My Self-Hosted System?

//greg//

Chief,

I believe the speed of the Hughes DNS servers leaves a lot to be desired. At times, they seem to time out, so anything that stores the DNS information on your computer is a good thing, as Martha would say. TweakMaster will collect and store the DNS for Internet Explorer use automatically in the host file for up to a couple of weeks and remind you when to run the update, which only takes a minute or two. Fasterfox, will only do it in Firefox for a couple of hours at best, because the longer you make it store the data, the slower page loads seem to get as it fills up.

The reason for the receive window, as I understand it, is to avoid the browser hanging around too long before displaying the error message, so that you can retry again. If I calculated it right back then, the combination of the receive window and the TTL was about 2 seconds, which IMHO is about right for lost requests. If you set the receive window at 256 or 512 kb, you waste time waiting for a response. Whether you are optimizing windows to the modem or the modem to windows, I'm not sure.

Using an MTU network value less than 1500, even though TweakMaster might suggest the optimum is 1420, etc. also seems to slow things down. In any case 1500 is the Windows standard, I believe, for the network side.

I don't think we really know how much of the window's settings are hard-programmed into the 7000s modem and how much can be modified with SOME of these settings. To me, it seems some can be changed and some cannot.

If you do enough tests, you can see some download / upload speed improvement, maybe 10%. However, that's hard to really prove, because of the varying loading on the Hughes system.

I cannot suggest TweakMaster as free anymore if they make people buy something else to register it, so I'll pass on recommending it in the future.

Snowman

You still didn't quantify how much " help " you think you're getting. The TCP/IP values you addressed (the ones we used a long time ago for the PC-hosted systems) only communicate between your Ethernet card and the next address in the chain. In the case of self-hosted systems, that's the IDU (DW6000/7000/HN7000/whatever). The other "tweaks" you mentioned are strictly browser-related. They've got little or nothing to do with the actual TCP/IP stack performance. Caching DNS addresses simply makes your browser respond faster assuming you've got a direct connection to the DNS server. The speed/performance of the connection itself remains unchanged. Actually, in the case of an active PROXY connection AND a user who's set his browser to check for most current page - I can actually envision the possibility where local caching might actually slow things down.

The reason for RWIN is to tell the TCP/IP stack how big a packet to order from the distant server. But it's useless in this case, since the request actually terminates with the IDU. Same thing for MTU; it's a function of MSS which is a sub-multiple of RWIN. Besides that, XP (and presumably Vista) TCP/IP stacks are supposed to be self-adjusting.

And this DNS business doesn't make much sense either, since PROXY ON is almost exclusively the HughesNet operating default. I can see a fallback use perhaps, but only if PROXY/WebAccel/et cetera are down hard - and a straight DNS path is the only way to keep up the HughesNet connection

//greg//

Jeez greg, are you this much fun at parties!!!??? Not sure what you mean in your 1st statement, in bold? I had an awful lot of failed pages in the weeks leading-up to my installation of Tweakmaster, which looked to me like HN's DNS was dead-as-a-doornail. That things have worked better since installing TM may be a coincidence, sure...

If all it's doing for me is maintaining the hosts file, I'm not sure it's worth it, but it is a very nice piece of software nonetheless.

BTW I did take a peek and it says the following which TMK is incorrect:The LCCU utility does not make the HKEY_USERS - .DEFAULT entry, only the HKEY_CURRENT_USER.

Fun ain't got a whole lot to do with it. I just figgered to save some readers a bit of money by pointing out why so many of these broadband "tweak" utilities CAN'T do much to enhance performance on HughesNet self-hosted connections. In some cases, they've actually been known to make things worse.

And you completely missed my point about the FAQ; that is, any TweakMaster (or equivalent) changes to the TCP/IP stack of a self-hosted system are pointless. In the case of the self-adjusting properties of XP/Vista, they may even be ignored (if not written over).

//greg//

No, actually I got your points, and I appreciate them very much! Note again the smilie!

I have many different computers here at home, and am going to pay closer attention in the future to whether an "enhanced HOSTS file" makes any real difference to surfing or not. Are you saying greg that if Hughes DNS is down, but comm is otherwise OK, that knowing specific IPs still doesn't help in accessing a website?

EDIT: I've been reading Spinnaker's responses to the "What exactly is a STATIC IP?" thread and think maybe I oughta just slink away. I need to understand how HNS works, at least certainly (much) better than presently...

Well, it's a tad complicated because the Hughes WebAccel servers are typically between their DNS servers and you. The WebAccel servers perform a dual function; as I understand it they provide both HPEP acceleration AND some form of caching or pre-fetch. Problem with bypassing the Hughes "proxy" to get to an OpenDNS server is that you lose the HTTP acceleration. That's what the OP started this topic about anyway.

In your case, yes - keeping a large HOSTS file can be a potentially workable alternative to relying on Hughes DNS servers. The problem is that it's typically a high maintenance solution. If a distant server makes any change to it's address whatsoever, your HOSTS file will fail you (for that site). To my knowledge, TweakMaster and equivalents will not/can not keep your HOSTS file current in this manner.

//greg//

Thanks for your reply, and your patience. A problem I have, along with that I'm old & tired, is that 99.9% of the time HN works just fine; so when something does glitch, trying to remember what to check and where to look and what to try etc. etc. is hard cuz the brain cells are no longer "fresh" and of course one doesn't have the 'net to surf for the answers again! I sure wouldn't want to be in HN Tech Support, and have to deal with the likes of ME!!!

(Disclaimer: I have never, ever, not once contacted Tech Support!!!)

We share a common problem. And - sounds like - reasonably close "works fine" percentage. When mine hiccups, I just reach for remote and watch something that's been gathering dust on the TIVO hard drive. Far more productive than inducing the pain of a phonecall to India

//greg//

I've ditched the Tweakmaster program (seems it wouldn't store more than 200 sites in its DNS Accelerator) and now am trying HostsMan instead (»www.abelhadigital.com/) which does not automatically insert new URLs into your HOSTS file, but for me the jury is still out on whether that helps at all anyway.

What DOES seem to help is that these programs can stop web pages from loading all the adclick junk some of them have, referring them instead to 127.0.0.1

I have often had my browser grind to a halt for all the crap on a page, and at least for these the HOSTS file programs seem to be beneficial.

Setting up a caching DNS server will make a noticeable difference for websites you visit often. Something else I have found is great is my Squid caching web proxy with some config file tweaks. Once static content is downloaded it is cached for the whole network; I have mine set to cache up to 128MB files. Windows updates for additional computers is a nice example, they just download directly from the cache, don't count against FAP, and are much faster (after downloading them for real the first time). I regularly install XP computers for work on my network and download all 150MB+ patches without showing much usage at all on the usage page afterwards. Caching DNS and a caching web proxy make for a much better experience.