dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
48555
share rss forum feed

SoCalJohn

join:2010-12-30
Sierra Madre, CA

Ditch the Time Warner DNS servers

If you're not a fan of the RoadRunner web redirect page, you can get rid of it and generally improve your page load times by using Google's DNS servers rather than Time Warners DNS server. Changing the settings in the "Preferences" web page didn't get rid of the RoadRunner redirect page in my case. The Google DNS servers are "8.8.8.8" and "8.8.4.4". I just changed my network settings and that RoadRunner search page is gone for good. Plus, some of my internet-enabled audio and video devices seem to be more reliable in looking up and connecting to streaming media.



DrDrew
That others may surf
Premium
join:2009-01-28
SoCal
kudos:15

1 recommendation

That can cause trouble with some CDN services like iTunes, Netflix, etc.:
»joemaller.com/2577/itunes-slowdo···gle-dns/

Using national DNS providers unaffiliated with ISPs (like Google DNS, OpenDNS, and others) often mean direct ISP to CDN provider links are skipped...
--
If it's important.... back it up... twice.



Racerbob
Premium
join:2001-06-24
Webster, NY
kudos:1
reply to SoCalJohn

You can opt out of that RR search page. »ww23.rr.com/index.php

My choice of DNS is OpenDNS. »www.opendns.com/

We have been using it for a very long time here.


SoCalJohn

join:2010-12-30
Sierra Madre, CA

Believe it or not, I opted out yet still get the RoadRunner redirect page. Frustrating.


SoCalJohn

join:2010-12-30
Sierra Madre, CA
reply to DrDrew

Very interesting, I hadn't realized that there was a geographic element. I'll test my performance on Netflix over the next few weeks and report back.



DrDrew
That others may surf
Premium
join:2009-01-28
SoCal
kudos:15
reply to SoCalJohn

said by SoCalJohn:

Believe it or not, I opted out yet still get the RoadRunner redirect page. Frustrating.

If you have router running DD-WRT or Tomato and are using DNSmasq for DNS forwarding you can block the redirects with the "bogus-nxdomain=ipaddr" command. It's what I do for my ISPs redirect DNS servers...
--
If it's important.... back it up... twice.

37563929

join:2010-12-30
Cleveland, OH
reply to SoCalJohn

TWC/RR has been doing the redirect thing for a long time, many(most?) people have not been using RR supplied DNS servers for a long time for this reason.



hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY
kudos:9

"many(most?) people have not been using RR supplied DNS servers for a long time for this reason"

Many people who read forums like this which in the general scheme of things means a few.

Hob
--
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson



Steve Mehs
Gun Control Is Using A Steady Hand
Premium
join:2005-07-16
kudos:1
reply to SoCalJohn

Why does this even matter? What benefit is it to use another redirect page other then RRs?



skuv

@rr.com

said by Steve Mehs:

Why does this even matter? What benefit is it to use another redirect page other then RRs?

In general, nothing. If you want to support someone else's ad revenue generator, instead of TW's, then that would matter to someone I guess.

But for the most part, the TW servers should be faster than anything else, because they are on basically the same network you are on. You don't have to go out to the Internet to reach another server.

Also the previous mentioned issue with CDN services. Content Distribution Networks. They know where you are by which DNS server you are using. If you're using a DNS server across the country from yourself, then the content you get from certain websites, or iTunes, or Netflix, or whatever will come from farther away, and thus be slower. Some TW regions have CDN servers on the same network as their customers, meaning that their customers that hit these CDN servers don't even go out to the Internet to get this content. Certain iTunes content is very fast for me because I see that I am connecting to local servers on TW's network when I do a 'netstat -a' on my computer. I have a lot of connections to those CDN servers. Without that, I imagine browsing and other content would be a bit slower.


Batavian

join:2003-10-27
Batavia, NY

I'd highly recommend this tool from Steve Gibson. Run the DNSbenchmark tool to find the fastest DNS. I agree with John. Very often your ISP does not have the fastest DNS server.

»www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm



mackey
Premium
join:2007-08-20
kudos:8

said by Batavian:

I agree with John. Very often your ISP does not have the fastest DNS server.

+1. Even when they're not down like they were last month, they can be pretty slow.

Any CDN using DNS as the sole means of routing to the closest datacenter is just plain broken. Google, OpenDNS, and Level 3 all use anycast to route your DNS queries to the closest DNS server, so even broken CDN's should still work pretty good. Anycast is what the CDN's *should* be using to route to the closest server!

I just ran a few DNS test queries using 'yahoo.com' as it should be pretty common. RR's was the slowest:

Google #1:
;; Query time: 48 msec
;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8)

;; Query time: 26 msec
;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8)

;; Query time: 31 msec
;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8)

Google #2:
;; Query time: 27 msec
;; SERVER: 8.8.4.4#53(8.8.4.4)

;; Query time: 26 msec
;; SERVER: 8.8.4.4#53(8.8.4.4)

;; Query time: 28 msec
;; SERVER: 8.8.4.4#53(8.8.4.4)

OpenDNS #1:
;; Query time: 25 msec
;; SERVER: 208.67.220.220#53(208.67.220.220)

;; Query time: 31 msec
;; SERVER: 208.67.220.220#53(208.67.220.220)

;; Query time: 17 msec
;; SERVER: 208.67.220.220#53(208.67.220.220)

OpenDNS #2:
;; Query time: 18 msec
;; SERVER: 208.67.220.222#53(208.67.220.222)

;; Query time: 24 msec
;; SERVER: 208.67.220.222#53(208.67.220.222)

;; Query time: 16 msec
;; SERVER: 208.67.220.222#53(208.67.220.222)

Level 3 #1:
;; Query time: 34 msec
;; SERVER: 4.2.2.2#53(4.2.2.2)

;; Query time: 16 msec
;; SERVER: 4.2.2.2#53(4.2.2.2)
;; WHEN: Mon Jan 3 03:43:29 2011
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 107

;; Query time: 16 msec
;; SERVER: 4.2.2.2#53(4.2.2.2)

Level 3 #2:
;; Query time: 16 msec
;; SERVER: 4.2.2.3#53(4.2.2.3)

;; Query time: 15 msec
;; SERVER: 4.2.2.3#53(4.2.2.3)

;; Query time: 19 msec
;; SERVER: 4.2.2.3#53(4.2.2.3)

Time Warner #1:
;; Query time: 79 msec
;; SERVER: 209.18.47.61#53(209.18.47.61)

;; Query time: 77 msec
;; SERVER: 209.18.47.61#53(209.18.47.61)

;; Query time: 87 msec
;; SERVER: 209.18.47.61#53(209.18.47.61)

Time Warner #2:
;; Query time: 75 msec
;; SERVER: 209.18.47.62#53(209.18.47.62)

;; Query time: 77 msec
;; SERVER: 209.18.47.62#53(209.18.47.62)

;; Query time: 77 msec
;; SERVER: 209.18.47.62#53(209.18.47.62)

So, although not really slow at ~80ms, RR's DNS is the slowest of the most well known ones.

/mackey

sludgehound

join:2007-03-12
New York, NY

1 edit

duplicate msg


sludgehound

join:2007-03-12
New York, NY
reply to mackey

Hadn't checked my DNS from TW RR network settings for awhile on Win 7 Ultimate 32x. Had been set to OpenDNS but see none selected now so guess been on RR. And the Printer Server feature was still active (should be uninstalled).
Tried the Level 3 settings & seems fast but also some web pages were opening cleaner w/o the overlap that happened on some pages. Making a good note about Level 3 settings. Thanks!

Random fortune from 'computers'
Mr. Jones related an incident from "some time back" when IBM Canada Ltd. of Markham, Ont., ordered some parts from a new supplier in Japan. The company noted in its order that acceptable quality allowed for 1.5 per cent defects (a fairly high standard in North America at the time).
The Japanese sent the order, with a few parts packaged separately in plastic. The accompanying letter said: "We don't know why you want 1.5 per cent defective parts, but for your convenience, we've packed them separately."
-- Excerpted from an article in The (Toronto) Globe and Mail


Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
kudos:5
reply to 37563929

Even after doing DNSBenchMark long (30 minutes) test, Oceanic TWC still is the fastest dns servers at 15-16ms. I had trouble way back when the redirection started with opting out but once that "took" I have never gotten the redirection again. Periodically, there has been a problem with using Oceanic's DNS servers as they can get very unreliable at times particularly in the evenings. So, I have 5 DNS servers designated. The first two are Oceanic ones and I used both DNSBenchMark and Google's tool to find the fastest. In fact, the fastest one usually is not an RR server. It is just an Oceanic server. Then I added Clearwire as sometimes it tests faster and then Level 3. Level 3 you have to be careful with and for us in Hawaii it is more than DOUBLE in slowness compared to Oceanic's servers. You also need to be careful in Hawaii to not allow the backup DNS server out of Orange RR as it is painfullly slow. Google servers are VERY slow in Hawaii. You also must consider the accuracy of the servers and that is where Oceanic RR servers fall down in the evenings.
--
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson



skuv

@rr.com
reply to mackey

said by mackey:

Any CDN using DNS as the sole means of routing to the closest datacenter is just plain broken. Google, OpenDNS, and Level 3 all use anycast to route your DNS queries to the closest DNS server, so even broken CDN's should still work pretty good. Anycast is what the CDN's *should* be using to route to the closest server!

Apparently, you are confused as to what Anycast is. Anycast is Anycast DNS. Meaning that the same IP is used to represent several geographically diverse DNS servers. And since routing is by shortest path first, you are going to go to the closest Anycast DNS IP for your queries, unless that one is down. If a CDN is using Anycast to find where you are, it is solely using DNS, which is what you just said was plain broken.

And if you are using Google, OpenDNS, or Level 3 as your DNS servers, you will be going to the CDN that is closest to THOSE ANYCAST DNS servers, not what are closest to your ISP. Like I said previously, some TWC sites have Akamai CDN servers within their local networks. Meaning, if you use an outside DNS server, you are NEVER going to go to the Akamai CDN servers that are closest to you.

But it's your ball, take it and go play with how you believe it's played.


mackey
Premium
join:2007-08-20
kudos:8

said by skuv :

said by mackey:

Any CDN using DNS as the sole means of routing to the closest datacenter is just plain broken. Google, OpenDNS, and Level 3 all use anycast to route your DNS queries to the closest DNS server, so even broken CDN's should still work pretty good. Anycast is what the CDN's *should* be using to route to the closest server!

Apparently, you are confused as to what Anycast is. Anycast is Anycast DNS. Meaning that the same IP is used to represent several geographically diverse DNS servers. And since routing is by shortest path first, you are going to go to the closest Anycast DNS IP for your queries, unless that one is down. If a CDN is using Anycast to find where you are, it is solely using DNS, which is what you just said was plain broken.

Uh, YOU are the one confused as to what anycast is. Anycast has NOTHING to do with DNS. DNS servers MAY us it, but so can ANY other IP-based server including web servers. Anycast is simply a block of IP addresses that are announced (mostly using BGP) from multiple places simultaneously. LMGTFY

said by skuv :

And if you are using Google, OpenDNS, or Level 3 as your DNS servers, you will be going to the CDN that is closest to THOSE ANYCAST DNS servers, not what are closest to your ISP. Like I said previously, some TWC sites have Akamai CDN servers within their local networks. Meaning, if you use an outside DNS server, you are NEVER going to go to the Akamai CDN servers that are closest to you.

Actually, even using DNS based geo-location, you MAY still be routed to the TWC Akamai CDN server if it is also the closest to the outside DNS server. If that Akamai CDN is using anycast (which, again, has NOTHING to do with DNS) like they should, ALL DNS servers will return the EXACT SAME IP and TWC's routers will (automatically) take care of routing it to the on-network server.

/mackey
Expand your moderator at work

sleven

join:2011-01-07
Brooksville, FL
reply to SoCalJohn

Re: Ditch the Time Warner DNS servers

I've been having some bandwidth problems the past few days and the ping benchmarks were in the 200-250ms range.

I ran the benchmark, "NameBench" and the analysis report said that 8.8.4.4's DNS was 76% faster than RR's DNS. That is enough to make me want to switch.


spdickey

join:2002-11-17
Pacific Palisades, CA

Optimize your DNS by testing it with the GRC DNS Benchmark program »www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm

From here, I got better results with OpenDNS, Genuity and Symantec DNS servers over the RR ones.



skuv

@rr.com
reply to mackey

said by mackey:

Uh, YOU are the one confused as to what anycast is. Anycast has NOTHING to do with DNS. DNS servers MAY us it, but so can ANY other IP-based server including web servers. Anycast is simply a block of IP addresses that are announced (mostly using BGP) from multiple places simultaneously. LMGTFY

Hahah, no. That is NOT what Anycast DNS is. I have worked with Anycasted DNS servers since 1998. I KNOW what an Anycast DNS server is. What you are calling Anycast DNS is just having different IP's for the same hostname with low TTL's so that they can easily be changed to other CDN IP's without much downtime. That is not Anycast DNS.

Anycast DNS, like I already described, is when you have at least 2 DNS servers in 2 different physical locations, and you have only 1 IP that you give to customers. But the IP is routed to 2 different destinations, which are the 2 DNS servers in different locations. And the link you provided even says that. So I'm not sure why the hell you're telling me that I don't know what Anycast DNS is. Yes, you can Anycast anything. But what you described is NOT Anycast DNS.


mackey
Premium
join:2007-08-20
kudos:8

said by skuv :

Hahah, no. That is NOT what Anycast DNS is. I have worked with Anycasted DNS servers since 1998. I KNOW what an Anycast DNS server is. What you are calling Anycast DNS is just having different IP's for the same hostname with low TTL's so that they can easily be changed to other CDN IP's without much downtime. That is not Anycast DNS.

Huh? I am NOT talking about multiple IPs going to the same hostname. I don't know why you're obsessed with insisting Anycast can only be used for DNS. Forget DNS for now. My original point was that these CDNs should be using Anycast HTTP (for example) instead of relying on DNS (of any kind) as their sole means of geo-routing.

/mackey


rchandra
Stargate Universe fan
Premium
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to skuv

OKOK, hold up here.

I see you're constantly capitalizing "Anycast," which says to me this is a proper noun, meaning a very specific set of DNS servers. By capitalizing that, you do not mean the (generic) concept of anycasting. So it could be this guy is absolutely correct.

However...just to clarify, "anycasting" (small "a", the concept) means a destination address which may be handled by any of several servers. This differs from broadcasting where all hosts on a network receive the packets, and from multicasting where many hosts get the packets but those hosts must indicate they wish to receive those packets by joining the multicast group of interest (IGMP).

Furthermore, DNS servers are free to answer with any results they wish. They don't have to be dumb database machines which give the same answer set regardless of anything. Because of things like Google DNS and OpenDNS, it might be less than advised to answer differently depending on the source address of the request packet. But there is nothing in the DNS specifications which prohibits this behavior AFAIK. It's now far better to employ anycast addresses on the content delivery machines.

Anything else, such as multiple records returned with low times-to-live, has nothing to do with the X-casting or routing used to make or receive the queries.

Me, I run my own BIND9 instance with the ICANN root hints. So unless TWC is going to do goofy things like NAT my DNS packets to their DNS servers, I don't have to worry about any of that.

--
English is a difficult enough language to interpret correctly when its rules are followed, let alone when a writer chooses not to follow those rules.


Jeopardy! replies and randomcaps REALLY suck!