snowsam
join:2001-04-11
Signal Mountain, TN
| reply to embj
Linux Alternative -- dnscache
For people who are running an non-windows server, the equivalent software is DNSCACHE, one part of the djbdns package (you don't have to run it all to run dnscache). See »www.daemonnews.org/200210/ezdjbdns.html for one install guide, see the original author's web site: »cr.yp.to/djbdns.html .
The cache software works quite well and I highly recommend it if you have a Linux, BSD, etc box running.
Sam
--
FWD Number: 14939 see »www.freeworldialup.com/ |
|
embj
Premium
join:2003-09-12
Fayetteville, NC
clubs: | reply to ltm320
Re: [TWC]Treewalk-What a difference! DNS slow? Solved!
I'm planning to try Treewalk as soon as I find a bargain on some RAM for an older system I've got. I have a DNS server running, but it's for internal lookups only...so, I need to get another machine to run TW. |
|
attilahooper2000
@rr.com
| reply to Tom Mc
Re: [TWC]Treewalk-What a difference! DNS slow? Sol
Tried Treewalk, didnt solve my dns prob. odddly enugh dslreports is one site that my TWC RR Manhattan cannot resolve for squat. The other significant problem I have is with DNS2Go, heartbeat failures, complaining about port 1227, which is fwded, general mailais since RR ug to 5 Mb DL.
I think the truth is that some ISPs DNS servers are hosed, reason unknown, brazilian conspiracy ? :/
using 4.2.2.1 ... 4.2.2.5 as well as ISP dhcp dns servers, the results are much better. dns2go still compaining about port1227 but eventually hits their hosts and recovers. without L3s DNS servers (4.2.2....) I get nothing, dead.
What a bloody mess the internet is in. worse than all the spam ever sent, put together. |
|
Tom Mc
join:2004-06-17
| reply to ltm320
Although I had my doubts, I have installed Treewalk on my laptop. This has resulted in faster connections, and I may well leave it installed. But, I have a found a couple interesting findings.
Sometimes, I see the connection still going through the secondary DNS (RoadRunner). That has surprised me.
In the thread »DNS Problems ".tk"
it was noted that RR DNS's have problems still with tk domain URLs. When I tried the 4.2.2.1 DNS, I was then able to access the page mentioned there. However, with Treewalk installed, I was not able to access that URL. I just now added 4.2.2.1 as the next DNS to use after Treewalk, and now I can access that page again. Doesn't it seem like Treewalk should have enabled access to tk domain URL's? |
|
freeness4
@optonline.net | reply to ltm320
Re: [TWC]Treewalk-What a difference! DNS slow? Solved!
I agree, Treewalk is a miracle! OOL DNS is so slow and Treewalk if way fast.
Andy
»www.teleco4.com |
|
Speedy8
Premium
join:2002-08-22
Alliance, OH
clubs:
| reply to ltm320
Re: [TWC]Treewalk-What a difference! DNS slow? Sol
This works great but for some reason now my wireless adapter occasionally drops connection and takes ~10 seconds to reconnect. It only does it while web browsing though, but not very often. I'd say an average of once every 1-2 hours maybe. Not a huge deal, but sort of annoying. |
|
ltm320
join:2002-02-24
Milwaukee, WI
| reply to Jolt927
I've tinkered around with my router (dlink) to answer your question. Indeed, I could change my router's DNS entry to point at my Treewalk PC, however, when I renewed my address info, the PC grabbed the router as DNS. -- I believe, although I'm not sure, that the router would then pass DNS requests to my Treewalk server, but that would mean a second hop.
So, my suggestion to you, and anyone else with a router DNS question .. leave the router alone, and only mess with the PC's config.
Configure each PC by going into network properties and manually configging the DNS entrys, unchecking "get from DHCP", and have each PC have the Treewalk pc's IP at the top of the DNS list. |
|
Jolt927
join:2001-11-30
Columbus, OH
| reply to Racerbob
said by Racerbob  :And in my Netgear router, leave "Get Automatically From ISP checked" ? I have pretty much the same question. We have 3 comptuers networked on a linksys router. I want to use TreeWalk DNS servers on all of them. If I understand correctly, I need to install TreeWalk on the computer that is turned on the most, and then point the other computers' DNS to the TreeWalk computer's IP (in my case, 192.168.1.100). However, what do I need to do to my router? Do I need to change any settings? |
|
Tom Mc
join:2004-06-17
| reply to ltm320
said by ltm320 : Yes, and my answer, that you don't need file sharing, was exactly answering your question, if that wasn't clear. You don't need it. I understand you don't want to lower your trusted zone settings. If I were you, I'd just poke a hole in it for port 53, UDP both directions. That should do it. I'd also define your trusted zone as only the few PCs on your home network, which may be totally different than the IPs you get on other public hotspots, thru their DHCP. Thanks again.
I had mistakenly interpreted "if being used on 1 PC" as meaning the DNS service being accessed by only one machine. |
|
ltm320
join:2002-02-24
Milwaukee, WI
| reply to Tom Mc
said by ltm320 :My question about whether file sharing is needed, was in regards to sharing Treewalk with other PCs here at my home. My concern about reducing the firewall settings in the Trusted Zone (as well as file sharing) is because if I installed and shared Treewalk, it would probably be from my laptop. Since I travel with my laptop and access "public" wireless networks occassionally, I wouldn't want my laptop with less secure settings. I keep even my Trusted Zone set as high as possible (Stealth mode - no sharing allowed). Yes, and my answer, that you don't need file sharing, was exactly answering your question, if that wasn't clear. You don't need it.
I understand you don't want to lower your trusted zone settings. If I were you, I'd just poke a hole in it for port 53, UDP both directions. That should do it. I'd also define your trusted zone as only the few PCs on your home network, which may be totally different than the IPs you get on other public hotspots, thru their DHCP. |
|
Tom Mc
join:2004-06-17
| reply to ltm320
said by ltm320 :No it does NOT require file sharing, if being used on 1 PC. I didn't have to tweak my firewall at all, actually. Not exactly sure what ports you'd have to open from one machine to another. Typically, I put all my internal PCs in the trusted group, so they don't have restrictions talking to eachother. Can each machine run Treewalk itself? Sure. Just install it on each one. But give the 1 pc server one a try first, and see if you can get that to work. Thanks for the response.
My question about whether file sharing is needed, was in regards to sharing Treewalk with other PCs here at my home.
My concern about reducing the firewall settings in the Trusted Zone (as well as file sharing) is because if I installed and shared Treewalk, it would probably be from my laptop. Since I travel with my laptop and access "public" wireless networks occassionally, I wouldn't want my laptop with less secure settings. I keep even my Trusted Zone set as high as possible (Stealth mode - no sharing allowed). |
|
ltm320
join:2002-02-24
Milwaukee, WI
| reply to Tom Mc
No it does NOT require file sharing, if being used on 1 PC.
I didn't have to tweak my firewall at all, actually. Not exactly sure what ports you'd have to open from one machine to another. Typically, I put all my internal PCs in the trusted group, so they don't have restrictions talking to eachother.
Can each machine run Treewalk itself? Sure. Just install it on each one. But give the 1 pc server one a try first, and see if you can get that to work. |
|
Tom Mc
join:2004-06-17
| reply to ltm320
said by ltm320 :I am doing just that. Install Treewalk on the PC that is going to be turned ON most of the time, if not all of the time. On the other PC, add the IP address of the Treewalk-pc at the top of the DNS server list in your tcp/ip configuration. Does this require file sharing on the machine running Treewalk?
I'm guessing it may require reducing the security setting for the Trusted Zone in the software firewall (I use EZ Armor)?
Can each machine on the home network run Treewalk for itself? |
|
Speedy8
Premium
join:2002-08-22
Alliance, OH
clubs: | reply to ltm320
This is great, been trying different pub DNS servers for awhile but nothing worked significantly better. |
|
Konaguy
Live From Kailua-Kona, Hawaii
Premium
join:2000-10-21
Kailua Kona, HI | reply to ltm320
Treewalk DNS is really good. I was having problems with Verizon's
DNS servers. I installed Treewalk and it made the world of difference. |
|
Racerbob
join:2001-06-24
Webster, NY | reply to ltm320
Re: [TWC]Treewalk-What a difference! DNS slow? Solved!
And in my Netgear router, leave "Get Automatically From ISP checked" ? |
|
ltm320
join:2002-02-24
Milwaukee, WI
| reply to Racerbob
I am doing just that.
Install Treewalk on the PC that is going to be turned ON most of the time, if not all of the time.
On the other PC, add the IP address of the Treewalk-pc at the top of the DNS server list in your tcp/ip configuration. |
|
Racerbob
join:2001-06-24
Webster, NY | reply to ltm320
How do you use this program with a router and two computers on your home network ? |
|
ltm320
join:2002-02-24
Milwaukee, WI
| reply to ltm320
I ran the DNSRU benchmark again for the heck of it. The one in the above message was done around 9pm, which could be prime-time usage for RoadRunner.
This one was taken at 9am, which I assume RR is under much less stress. The chart bears that out.
It's pretty obvious that RR's DNS server, at least the one in my area, is preposterously under stress during prime time. The reliability numbers go from in the 30's to almost 100. The avg time to resolution goes from 5.6 to 3.4 seconds.
Treewalk, of course, still kicks its ass, with average time of less than .1 seconds.
** 9PM **
24.160.227. 32 | Min | Avg | Max |Std.Dev|Reliab%
----------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------
Cached Name | 1.380 | 1.570 | 1.762 | 0.117 | 43.9
Uncached Name | 1.499 | 1.634 | 1.914 | 0.160 | 30.6
DotCom Lookup | 5.530 | 5.659 | 5.756 | 0.117 | 36.4
----------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------
** 9 AM **
24.160.227. 32 | Min | Avg | Max |Std.Dev|Reliab%|
----------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
Cached Name | 0.007 | 0.010 | 0.016 | 0.002 | 100.0 |
Uncached Name | 0.031 | 0.073 | 0.144 | 0.021 | 99.5 |
DotCom Lookup | 0.057 | 3.434 | 4.218 | 1.280 | 100.0 |
----------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|
|
ziggy530
join:2005-02-15
Brooklyn, NY |  reply to ltm320
Re: [TWC]Treewalk-What a difference! DNS slow? Sol
nice find, it is faster! |
|
