http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20844678 en Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:24:05 EDT Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:24:05 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20848132 Skippy25 : That is how DNS works.

If you have a DNS server and it does not have the answer it goes to the authoritive DNS server that is configured for it. It won't be going to Googles as mentioned above, it will eventually go to the root .com server which is what controls all .com DNS names.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20848132 Fri, 25 Jul 2008 14:14:28 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20846136 sivran : Right. Just run a local, caching DNS server that's configured to forward on to the ISP (or Open, or Level3) if it doesn't know the answer. No need for an end-user DNS to go straight to the authority, just up to the next link in the chain.

Mine currently forwards to OpenDNS for whatever it doesn't know.
--
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon profitable cause...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20846136 Fri, 25 Jul 2008 04:08:38 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20844678 Boricua65 : Thank you for that. My is now fixed.
--
Yo te digo, el mundo esta jodido]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20844678 Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:21:39 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20844414 cornelius785 : well let's see, if the URL is not cached in your dns server, it has to ask for it in another server (not yours). if that server's record is incorrect, well guess what, yours will be incorrect.

i also don't really see the advantage of running your own DNS server for most people. sure it may be faster, but the dns retrieval is nearly nothing compared to the downloading of content and then processing.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20844414 Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:38:20 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20843871 Nerdtalker : Or you could just use OpenDNS, which, by the way, was secure the whole time.

::shrug::]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20843871 Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:49:03 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20843753 ISurfTooMuch : You could, but why would you want to increase the load on authoritative DNS servers out there? Right now, if you type in www.google.com, if you don't have the IP address already cached, your machine queries your ISP's DNS server, which already knows the correct IP address. Google's nameservers only get queried if your ISP doesn't have an IP address cached on their DNS servers. If everyone was running DNS, Google's servers are going to get hammered, since queries won't just be coming from a few thousand ISPs but from a few hundred million users.

Also, as hard as it is to patch DNS servers now, can you imagine if everyone was running DNS? Instead of patching a few thousand machines, you'd have to patch a few hundred million.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20843753 Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:28:38 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20843717 ronpin : DNS was cool when speeds were slow and memory expensive. Now we could all run our very own DNS servers on the cheap. Why not?
--
50% of Americans vote - 30% are repugs -- do the math.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20843717 Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:20:36 EDT