dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
48
nbinont
join:2011-03-13

nbinont to TSI Marc

Member

to TSI Marc

Re: Google DNS versus ours

said by TSI Marc:

said by mlord:

said by TSI Gabe:

The first one, he's using 192.168.1.1 as his DNS server, not ours, hence why it's not working.

That's probably his router, which probably IS using TSI's server. Very standard setup, that.

Gabe appears to have looked that one up at the time and wrote this later in the thread:

»Re: [Cable] Slow DNS resolution for site on Teksavvy

Yes, but the first time I believe the dig command was was not going to the right server: »Re: [Cable] Slow DNS resolution for site on Teksavvy

And this problem happens regularly. but only on TSI. Very repeatable.
nbinont

nbinont to TSI Gabe

Member

to TSI Gabe
said by TSI Gabe:

Are you saying this is still happening now?

Yep, for the past 8 months. Everyday

TSI Gabe
Router of Packets
Premium Member
join:2007-01-03
Gatineau, QC

TSI Gabe

Premium Member

K...honestly this is going to be hard to reproduce now that we are running other DNS servers...I guess keep me posted if it happens again and I'll take another look. Since right now I'm able to resolve those domains just fine.
jstory
join:2011-02-05
New Westminster, BC

jstory to TSI Gabe

Member

to TSI Gabe
Just did.

Got a query response time of 76 msec and 75 msec, respectively, compared to 33 msec for 8.8.8.8.

mtr reports a ping of 13 msec, so maybe the server is just under heavy load.

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc to nbinont

Premium Member

to nbinont
k, I've asked Gabe to look into it more closely. I'm sure it's something logical we just need to find what it is.
nbinont
join:2011-03-13

nbinont to TSI Gabe

Member

to TSI Gabe
said by TSI Gabe:

K...honestly this is going to be hard to reproduce now that we are running other DNS servers...I guess keep me posted if it happens again and I'll take another look. Since right now I'm able to resolve those domains just fine.

Thanks! I'll follow up and try to reproduce it.

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc to jstory

Premium Member

to jstory
said by jstory:

Just did.

Got a query response time of 76 msec and 75 msec, respectively, compared to 33 msec for 8.8.8.8.

mtr reports a ping of 13 msec, so maybe the server is just under heavy load.

Gabe responded to you earlier. you have to use the Vancouver DNS servers since you're in BC..

That's because Vancouver has separate DNS servers.

You need to use 76.10.191.198 & 199 (these servers are not yet updated though)

we too can make our IPs respond no matter where you are but we just haven't done that.. there's no real need.

Google has that 8.8.8.8 block anycasted.. it's a routing trick.. that make all the routers think that IP is really close but in fact there are srvers everywhere with the same IP...

Mike2009
join:2009-01-13
Ottawa, ON
TP-Link Archer C7
Technicolor DCM476
Grandstream HT701

Mike2009 to HiVolt

Member

to HiVolt
said by HiVolt:

said by mlord:

Same here.

Same thing I've experienced...

Me too that's why I switched to using google a couple of years ago. I'll try out the TSI ones again.

Guspaz
Guspaz
MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC

1 recommendation

Guspaz to TSI Marc

MVM

to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc:

Google has that 8.8.8.8 block anycasted.. it's a routing trick.. that make all the routers think that IP is really close but in fact there are srvers everywhere with the same IP...

There's no reason TSI couldn't anycast the DNS server IPs so that the same DNS IPs are used anywhere in TSI's territory :P Of course, that's kind of pointless since the vast majority of people use DHCP/PPPoE to automatically set the DNS servers anyhow. Most of the people setting theirs by hand are DNS ricers :P

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc

Premium Member

well.. there is one good reason.. and well, it's that it would take a bit of lifting to do it and make sure it's done right and for what? not much value..

we'd have to move everything else off that class C...
nbinont
join:2011-03-13

nbinont

Member

said by nbinont:

said by TSI Gabe:

K...honestly this is going to be hard to reproduce now that we are running other DNS servers...I guess keep me posted if it happens again and I'll take another look. Since right now I'm able to resolve those domains just fine.

Thanks! I'll follow up and try to reproduce it.

Well, it seems like whatever Gabe did over the last week has fixed it for me! I verified that it was still acting up a few days ago (and it was), but tonight it seems to be resolving correctly the first time.

I waited for the cached entry to expire in TSI's DNS server, then asked it to resolve the site again. Last week it would fail a few times before finally getting something for the cache, and then be good until the cache expired again.

Tonight, after the cache expired it worked the first time. Waited for the cache to expire again (30 min expiry in this case), and tried again. Success again!

I assume I must be on one of Gabe's new DNS servers - and they seem to be working well!

Guess I'll have to go update my review...
Bugblndr
join:2010-03-02
Burlington, ON

Bugblndr

Member

Good news, time to change things up on my setup a bit and see for myself.
mlord
join:2006-11-05
Kanata, ON

mlord to nbinont

Member

to nbinont
said by TSI Marc:

Yes, but the first time I believe the dig command was was not going to the right server:
»Re: [Cable] Slow DNS resolution for site on Teksavvy

You do realize that only the originator (and TSI) can read threads in TSI Direct, right? Not the rest of us, so posting links to those threads doesn't help anyone here.

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc

Premium Member

said by mlord:

said by TSI Marc:

Yes, but the first time I believe the dig command was was not going to the right server:
»Re: [Cable] Slow DNS resolution for site on Teksavvy

You do realize that only the originator (and TSI) can read threads in TSI Direct, right? Not the rest of us, so posting links to those threads doesn't help anyone here.

yeah hehe AkFubar pointed that out to me too.. hehe I didn't realise at the time.. looks like nbinont's issue is solved now too. so it's all good