robbym627
Premium
join:2003-09-14
Springfield, IL
 ·surpasshosting
 ·Comcast
| reply to gswilder
Re: Alternate DNS Servers???
I have complete faith in Insight's service. A dns server is a dns server. It doesn't matter whose you use. If you find one faster then use it. If Insight couldn't provide the internet connection I desired then I would use someone else for my connection. I don't care wat company I work for, If I find something better somewhere else I will use it. |
|
rchwalk
Premium
join:2002-06-03
Peachtree City, GA
| reply to rchwalk
BeesTea,
Thank you! The site »www.tldp.org/HOWTO/DNS-HOWTO.html was very informative. I now have my BIND caching dns server up and running. I had so many little things wrong it wasn't funny. Now they have been corrected and my DNS server is now working. I just need to "tune" it to the list you have listed above rather than using internic's server list.
Thanks again!
rchwalk |
|
rchwalk
Premium
join:2002-06-03
Peachtree City, GA
| reply to BeesTea
BeesTea,
Thank you for the info! I will see how it goes. I have tried bind in the past but the documentation is a little to in depth for a beginner like me. Seems that I have the named daemon working but my windows machines do not like it. They complain that:
c:\>nslookup www.google.com
*** Can't find server name for address 192.168.168.9: Non-existent domain
Server: vnsc-bak.sys.gtei.net
Address: 4.2.2.2
Non-authoritative answer:
Name: www.google.akadns.net
Address: 64.233.171.104
Aliases: www.google.com
So I will check my config files again. I know it is something to do with my local domain configuration. Since the solaris server uses the named daemon to service dns lookups without a problem:
ultra10: /var/named: nslookup www.google.com
Server: localhost
Address: 127.0.0.1
Non-authoritative answer:
Name: www.google.akadns.net
Address: 64.233.171.104
Aliases: www.google.com
Thanks again for the documentation. I will look it over and attempt to fix this.
rchwalk |
|
gswilder
join:2000-12-30
Lexington, KY
| reply to tech327
What are these level 3's, and who do they belong to? Why are they faster? I did a ping and got some of the best results of any of the DNS servers posted so far.
4.2.2.1 and 4.2.2.2
By changing the DNS servers, I have been able to document changes in web browsing.
Thanks again.... |
|
BeesTea
Network Janitor
Premium,VIP
join:2003-03-08
00000
| reply to rchwalk
I'm using BIND 9 with split views. One view is for external queries and is a forward with cache. The other is a fake top level domain for my home network (machinename.home.lan). The BIND doc's can get kind of thick.
»www.isc.org/sw/bind/
If you use bind, you can probably get away with using the TLDP docs.
»www.tldp.org/HOWTO/DNS-HOWTO.html
There's also a slew of other caching specific DNS implementations should you not feel like wrestling the BIND bear.
»freshmeat.net/browse/149/
Cheers,
-BeesT
--
echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq |dc |
|
rchwalk
Premium
join:2002-06-03
Peachtree City, GA
| reply to BeesTea
BeesTea,
You mention that you run your own DNS Server behind your firewall/router. Can you point me in the right direction to get my own up and running? I have a Solaris Sparc Sun server and would like to get a caching DNS Server up and running. So far I have not yet been able to find a good example of the cache.db etc..... files.
Thanks! |
|
Stormhockey21
@insightBB.com | reply to gswilder
How do I switch, and find the fastest DNS server. Thank you. |
|
tech327
join:2003-01-02
Louisville, KY | reply to gswilder
i have good luck with level 3's 4.2.2.1 and 4.2.2.2. |
|
BeesTea
Network Janitor
Premium,VIP
join:2003-03-08
00000
| reply to IGGY
said by IGGY  :
If you don't value part of the product your employed to upkeep or sell. Why should a customer see value in something you don't as an employee?
I don't know what robbym627 values or doesn't. I do know that someone saying that another dns server, that they don't maintain, has lower latency than another, that they also don't maintain, doesn't really reflect on what they think of the service that they do maintain. That's just me I guess.
Personally, I think you're just jaded at the company and frankly I couldn't imagine giving money to an organization that I felt was screwing me so badly. Other than the IRS of course, who would promptly throw my butt in jail if I stopped. Outside of that, I don't give my money to people/organizations/companies that make me feel the way insight apparently makes you feel.
-BeesT
--
echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq |dc |
|
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
| reply to BeesTea
Yes. But not promoting the AT&T nameservers - when that is what your company users. Tends to make you wonder if those who work for the company tend to not see value in using those nameservers. It's one of those things of - if the AT&T nameservers are good enough for the customer - why would you want to use another companies? Maybe this makes no sense to you - but makes perfect sense to me.
If you don't value part of the product your employed to upkeep or sell. Why should a customer see value in something you don't as an employee?
--
Test Your Security Benefit for Children's Cancer Cable Diagnostics My Blog |
|
BeesTea
Network Janitor
Premium,VIP
join:2003-03-08
00000
| reply to IGGY
said by IGGY :
Is just me? Or isn't it sort of sad when an employee of the company advocates using another companies DNS server? Or am I just wanting to read more into this?
Apparently you are. Insight doesn't run any of it's own nameservers.
-BeesT
--
echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq |dc |
|
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL | reply to gswilder
Is just me? Or isn't it sort of sad when an employee of the company advocates using another companies DNS server? Or am I just wanting to read more into this? |
|
BeesTea
Network Janitor
Premium,VIP
join:2003-03-08
00000
| reply to BeesTea
Just to check, I looked up some other speakeasy name servers to see if any others were as low latency as the one robby listed. Sadly, they're not. I'm going to be using the 17ms latency server for sure as my main forwarder as it's half the time of the best attbi. Maybe folks can post other fast nameservers ?
Remember, if you change your DNS to a server off the at&t network, there is no guarantee it will always work. If ever the other site decide they no longer want to forward queries for other IP blocks tat they don't own, the show's over.
66.93.87.2 - dns.sea1.speakeasy.net.
64.81.79.2 - dns.sfo1.speakeasy.net.
64.81.45.2 - dns.lax1.speakeasy.net.
64.81.159.2 - dns.chi1.speakeasy.net.
64.81.127.2 - dns.dfw1.speakeasy.net.
216.254.95.2 - dns.nyc1.speakeasy.net.
216.27.175.2 - dns.atl1.speakeasy.net.
66.92.159.2 - dns.wdc1.speakeasy.net.
66.92.224.2 - phl.speakeasy.net.
64 bytes from 66.93.87.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=48 time=68.5 ms
64 bytes from 64.81.79.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=48 time=59.8 ms
64 bytes from 64.81.45.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=49 time=97.1 ms
64 bytes from 64.81.159.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=17.0 ms
64 bytes from 64.81.127.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=49 time=68.4 ms
64 bytes from 216.254.95.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=50 time=37.3 ms
64 bytes from 216.27.175.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=47 time=83.9 ms
64 bytes from 66.92.159.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=48 time=73.2 ms
64 bytes from 66.92.224.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=50 time=37.7 ms
Cheers,
-BeesT
--
echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq |dc |
|
BeesTea
Network Janitor
Premium,VIP
join:2003-03-08
00000
| reply to robbym627
Thanks Robby, I get very fast latency to that server. I'm switching over to it myself as well.
I see 17ms to the speakeasy server listed.
Here's the latency from my insight connection to the nameservers above. None come close to that latency.
64 bytes from 204.127.198.4: icmp_seq=1 ttl=52 time=117 ms
64 bytes from 216.148.227.68: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=61.5 ms
64 bytes from 204.127.202.4: icmp_seq=1 ttl=52 time=36.3 ms
64 bytes from 63.240.76.4: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=41.0 ms
64 bytes from 204.127.198.19: icmp_seq=1 ttl=52 time=118 ms
64 bytes from 216.148.227.79: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=59.8 ms
64 bytes from 63.240.76.19: icmp_seq=1 ttl=52 time=39.1 ms
64 bytes from 204.127.199.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=52 time=115 ms
64 bytes from 216.148.227.204: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=57.8 ms
64 bytes from 204.127.204.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=37.2 ms
64 bytes from 63.240.76.198: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=49.1 ms
--
echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq |dc |
|
robbym627
Premium
join:2003-09-14
Springfield, IL | reply to gswilder
I switched from Insight dns to Speakeasy in Chicago and I was able to tell a difference. 64.81.159.2 |
|
MSauk
MSauk
Premium
join:2002-01-17
Sandy, UT | reply to BeesTea
thank you! the ones I had were not good, but the ones you provided decreased my ping to insight along with other sites...Thanks
--
InsightBB = Monopoly |
|
BeesTea
Network Janitor
Premium,VIP
join:2003-03-08
00000
| reply to gswilder
I do use them all, only because I run my own caching nameserver on my local network. You will want to select the ones closest/fastest for you.
ping /n 1 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
Do that for each IP, take the 2-3 lowest numbers, they are the most responsive network wise to your location.
Cheers,
-BeesT
--
echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq |dc |
|
gswilder
join:2000-12-30
Lexington, KY
| reply to BeesTea
So do you use ALL of these at once? And does it use them all, or is there a priority to the list. Is the first one listed, the primary?
Is there a problem if you use one from another service provider other than Insight?
Thanks again...
Greg |
|
BeesTea
Network Janitor
Premium,VIP
join:2003-03-08
00000
| reply to gswilder
Sure you can. You can use any nameserver that will forward queries for you. Here's the list of servers I use in my local nameserver.
204.127.198.4
216.148.227.68
204.127.202.4
63.240.76.4
204.127.198.19
216.148.227.79
63.240.76.19
204.127.199.8
216.148.227.204
204.127.204.8
63.240.76.198
I keep the list limited to nameservers on our network.
204.127.198.4 - ns1.attbi.com.
216.148.227.68 - ns2.attbi.com.
204.127.202.4 - ns5.attbi.com.
63.240.76.4 - ns6.attbi.com.
204.127.198.19 - ns7.attbi.com.
216.148.227.79 - ns8.attbi.com.
63.240.76.19 - ns10.attbi.com.
204.127.199.8 - ns11.attbi.com.
216.148.227.204 - ns12.attbi.com.
204.127.204.8 - ns13.attbi.com.
63.240.76.198 - ns14.attbi.com.
A quick ping based latency test will show you which is most responsive network-wise for you. Unfortunately, it does not show you which respond fastest to query.
Cheers,
-BeesT
--
echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq |dc |
|
gswilder
join:2000-12-30
Lexington, KY
| Is it possible to different DNS servers than the Insightbb ones? (63.240.76.4 and 204.127.198.4) Someone posted something a few days ago about using some Sprintlink general DNS servers.
I have all TCP/IP "hardcoded" on my home network. I use static IP addresses, hardcoded gateway (my router), and hardcoded DNS.
Just wondering if any alternate DNS servers might improve reponse times. Also, are there only 2 Insightbb DNS servers?
Thanks in advance...
Greg |
|
