HouseFinch
join:2009-11-10
San Jose, CA
| reply to nwrickert
Re: We got some news! Slow Web Page Loading
said by nwrickert  :That is being set by some software (or maybe a virus) on your system. You are right. It turns out that I run Dynamic DNS updater service on my computer, after uninstalling this service, the DNS setting are no longer touched.
Thanks for the heads up. |
|
nwrickert
sand groper
Premium,MVM
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Midwest
| reply to HouseFinch
What's interesting is when I check my DNS settings of Ethernet or Wireless connections
Somehow, they were set to
"Use the following DNS server addresses"
Preferred DNS server: 216.145.35.35
Alternate DNS server: 216.146.36.36 That is being set by some software (or maybe a virus) on your system.
--
AT&T Uverse; Zyxel NBG334W router (behind the 2wire gateway); openSuSE 11.0; firefox 3.0.15 |
|
HouseFinch
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to comet52
I tried similar things as many of you suggested, and got similar results as comet52. That is, manually changing DNS server IPs not quite fixed it, but only got about 5 minutes boost, then slowness came back.
I have a 3800HGV-B RG, software: 5.29.105.94
My computer running XP Pro connects to RG in one of two ways
(1) By wire, connects to RG's lan port directly, or
(2) By wireless, connects to my local router, which in turn connects to RG as a DMZ client(DMZplus Enabled)
RG always reports using DNS (Broadband Link -> Details)
68.94.156.1
68.94.157.1
I also change my local router to manually set DNS to
68.94.156.1
68.94.157.1
What's interesting is when I check my DNS settings of Ethernet or Wireless connections
Somehow, they were set to
"Use the following DNS server addresses"
Preferred DNS server: 216.145.35.35
Alternate DNS server: 216.146.36.36
I thought I had accidentally configured it before, so I changed them to
68.94.156.1
68.94.157.1
then my webpage loading got a boost
then after few minutes, the slowness came back
I checked the network connection setting again
the DNS magically reverted back to
216.145.35.35
216.146.36.36
No matter how many times I change to correct settings, reboot, or even use automatic DNS, on wire or wireless interface, both network connections will eventually and stubbornly change back to
216.145.35.35
216.146.36.36
I am pretty sure it's DNS with 216 associated with slow page loading or failed DNS lookup.
Believe or not, both RG and my local router still reports using DNS servers
68.94.156.1
68.94.157.1
Looks like RG is somehow changing my computer's DNS setting, but is that possible? Have you guys seen similar things? |
|
comet52
join:2009-11-10
Madison, WI
|  reply to bclbob
I have this problem too. This past weekend it started to get much worse. As of now I can barely get pages to load sometimes, the stall just becomes permanent. Sometimes they partially load with a lot of garbage on the page, something that didn't happen before the past weekend. No major changes were made to the computer.
I discovered this thread in the course of trying to solve the problem, and instituted the dns fix, and later put opendns on in another effort. In both cases, I got a temporary boost, about 5 minutes or so of real fast surfing before it bogged down again.
I'm running XP and using Opera and Firefox, both browsers have the same problem. AT&T tech tried playing with my rg and again, I got the temporary boost then back to bogged down. Clearing all cache, cookies, etc. out of the browsers seems to give the same temporary boost, but none of the fixes seems to last more than a few minutes, just surf a few pages and I'm back to waiting, hitting reload over and over, etc.
So I'm wondering if there's anything else I can try? I'm getting close to dropping Uverse as I don't see what else I can do and I am tired of living with this and now that it's gone from a constant annoyance to a major headache I'm about out of patience.
If you have any suggestions please send them along, thanks. |
|
bclbob
join:2000-06-23
Oak Park, IL
clubs: | reply to bclbob
|
|
bclbob
join:2000-06-23
Oak Park, IL
clubs:
| reply to nwrickert
said by nwrickert :The DNS record for www.cnn.com has a TTL of 150 seconds. So caching that record on the DNS server doesn't help a lot. That's probably why it was slower. No. I just did another test - I set the timeout to 60 seconds for the query.
Then I started the loop for www.cnn.com, it runs without issue until I start a loop for www.yahoo.com in parallel. As soon as I start that one, the www.cnn.com hangs until the 60s timeout. |
|
nwrickert
sand groper
Premium,MVM
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to bclbob
The DNS record for www.cnn.com has a TTL of 150 seconds. So caching that record on the DNS server doesn't help a lot. That's probably why it was slower.
--
AT&T Uverse; Zyxel NBG334W router (behind the 2wire gateway); openSuSE 11.0; firefox 3.0.14 |
|
bclbob
join:2000-06-23
Oak Park, IL
clubs:
| reply to Ken
Aha ... that was a good idea!
I wrote a quick shell script that does 500 DNS queries using the unix "host" command to look up a host name. So I ran it against www.cnn.com and www.yahoo.com.
No problems.
Then I ran both of the scripts in parallel. The script querying www.cnn.com is hanging on requests. Hangs a lot for 5-10 seconds at a time. Strangely the www.yahoo.com one does not hang at all, not I just tried www.chicagotribune.com and its the same deal as yahoo. So it seems partly related to the host name being looked up. |
|
cathyy
join:2000-11-30
30000 | reply to Ken
I certainly have this problem! Not surprisingly, I use a Mac. Frankly it sucks. My Internet speed is good...except for the 90% plus packet loss at the first three hops. |
|
Ken
Premium,MVM
join:2003-06-16
Brownsburg, IN
| reply to UResearch
said by UResearch :
I will say it one more time, if your using a UVerse RG, the problem is there. Some MAY not see the issue as much if there is a light load. The heavier the load, the more obvious the issue.
Your explanation is quite possible, but is there some way to test this? Is there an easy way to perform 500 DNS lookups in quick succession? If so then everyone could check to see if they have the problem or not. |
|
bashful9999
join:2006-02-18
Geneva, IL | reply to UResearch
This topic has once again un-stickied itself. Can someone please re-sticky it? |
|
UResearch
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to comcastftw
Nice to see someone else dug into this a little more! Seems that some other people feel for w/e reason their RG is above this issue and not affected by it, though it affects all 2Wire RGs. I tried to explain several months back from my research some of the 2Wire RGs issues, and why it happens, the cause and how it can be fixed. Now all I see is posts blaming certain operating systems, heh.
I will say it one more time, if your using a UVerse RG, the problem is there. Some MAY not see the issue as much if there is a light load. The heavier the load, the more obvious the issue. If you do some testing though, it is easy to see there is an issue, even under a light load. It is also possible about some people have forgot what normal is and taken the issue as normal. Heavier loads can cause errors and broken webpage loading, where lighter loads may just have a small delay in the loading that is still able to correct itself. Again, do some proper testing 
Again ATT, what gives? |
|
nwrickert
sand groper
Premium,MVM
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to comcastftw
A general comment on this issue.
When U-verse was installed here, I connected my router and put it in DMZ mode. My plan was to then look at the DNS settings on the RG, to see if I could set them suitably and dispense with my router. Regrettably, there are not DNS settings on the RG, leaving me no choice but to continue using a router.
In my experience, router DNS support is mostly pretty crappy.
There's one computer used here, that is provided and configured by an employer. It makes over 500 DNS requests on startup, and most of those requests result in failure (they are to private names on the employer site). That puts a load that router DNS seems unable to handle. My speedstream 5861 rebooted. When I tried a Westell 2200, that did not reboot but the DNS function would sometimes hang and could only be fixed with a reboot. A Westell 327 rebooted. A Belkin wired router hung, and had to be rebooted to allow internet access.
I fixed the 5861 problem by configuring its DHCP server to give out specific DNS servers, instead of giving out its own IP address as DNS server. An SMC router actually worked, because it's DHCP does give out the DNS servers instead of giving out its own address. My current router can be configured to give out the DNS server name instead of its own address (and I have it configured that way).
The basic problem is that DNS service provided by a router is intended only for light use, and usually cannot withstand heavy use.
I can understand why AT&T might be reluctant to allow DNS configuration in the RG. The RG has to provide DNS support for the STB, so AT&T wants DNS to be such as to make the STB reliable. But, in my opinion, there should at least be an option for the RG to give its clients the ISP dns servers directly, in place of acting as its own DNS server.
--
AT&T Uverse; Zyxel NBG334W router (behind the 2wire gateway); openSuSE 11.0; firefox 3.0.14 |
|
comcastftw
@MIT.EDU | reply to David
I had this problem forever on U-verse, never knew about these solutions. I finally gave up and switched back to comcast when I determined that the 2wire was recording all dns hits and counts to its rom (datamining) and DoS'ing itself. |
|
mjwise
join:2007-05-09
Ann Arbor, MI
·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to dave006
I have noticed the problem on a Windows 2003 Server machine via Ethernet and a Windows XP netbook via wifi. I have another computer running Windows 2000 but I don't use it enough to access the Internet to notice it or not. It's weird, because I never had the problem until about 2 months ago, and it just got steadily worse and worse (yes, the RG has been reset in those two months). |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX | reply to dave006
Were you asking me? I Windows XP SP3, Windows 7, and Linux (Fedora). I've never seen the problem, I don't think. I even tried hardcoding the DNS IP addresses to see if it made a difference, and I didn't notice any. |
|
dave006
join:1999-12-26
Boca Raton, FL
·AT&T U-Verse
1 edit | reply to antidk
What version of Windows are you running?
I have a mix and only an old laptop running Windows XP SP2 does not have the problem with the DNS cache in the RG. All of the others benefit from hardcoding the AT&T Anycast DNS servers directly.
The other Windows machines are Windows 7 except for one with Vista SP 1 that is used for product testing.
Dave |
|
antidk
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
said by MyDogHsFleas :1) Lots of people (like me) don't have any such problem. It seems to be limited to specific kinds of PCs or OSes. Three Windows PCs and four Macs in the house. All have the same problem unless I hardcode the DNS. I honestly don't care as all work fine. But it's strange they can't fix it. |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to mjwise
said by mjwise :I recently switched to OpenDNS because DNS searches through the RG had gotten to the point that they were failing about 15-20% of the time. It's really embarrassing that AT&T can't fix such a basic problem with their service. FYI:
1) Lots of people (like me) don't have any such problem. It seems to be limited to specific kinds of PCs or OSes.
2) OpenDNS has nothing to do with it. You could also simply hardcode the AT&T DNS server IP addresses in your PCs and get the same effect. |
|
mjwise
join:2007-05-09
Ann Arbor, MI | reply to David
I recently switched to OpenDNS because DNS searches through the RG had gotten to the point that they were failing about 15-20% of the time. It's really embarrassing that AT&T can't fix such a basic problem with their service. |
|
