coxengr
Premium,VIP
join:2002-03-09
Atlanta, GA
| Gulf Coast test info
I wanted to make folks aware of a trial we are conducting in our Gulf Coast Florida region.
Currently, we are testing a service that returns a web page with enhanced error results when a web page request would have otherwise just returned a DNS error. Generally, DNS errors are caused by misspelled URLs and syntax errors such as “ww” instead of “www” or “con” instead of “com.” When possible, customers who have entered a URL that cannot be found will be shown a web page identifying some possible alternative sites they might have been trying to reach. If we can’t determine any alternative sites, we simply present another search box. These enhanced error results are designed to help the average user more quickly reach their web destinations, and only affect web page responses ('A' records to those in the know).
During our trial, some customers with special DNS configurations (like some custom settings for company laptops used at home) may experience some errors. Those with a need to work around these results pages can statically set their DNS to one of the following IP’s: 68.105.28.13 and 68.105.29.13.
While I understand that to some of you power users here in the BBR forum may not find this feature useful, keep in mind that we’re giving you an opt out option, and that for most customers, this will actually represent an improvement to their service. The team working on this project is monitoring feedback from all areas, so please feel free to post comments on the performance and implementation of the enhancement here. You may not receive a formal response, but all comments will be reviewed. Thanks.
--
Want the most out of BBR? Visit our help page: »members.cox.net/coxengr/bbr_help Are you a Cox employee? Please read this before posting: »members.cox.net/coxengr/bbr_cox |
|
almex
Premium
join:2001-09-18
Henderson, NV
clubs: | Sounds very similar to SiteFinder.
--
"Careful, we don't want to learn from this!" --Calvin & Hobbes |
|
robertfl
Premium
join:2005-10-10
Mary Esther, FL | I've noticed that webpages loaded faster. Is this a result of the test here?
Rob |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ | reply to coxengr
Oh NO! dont tell me cox is going to start that verislime crap via dns like other providers are doing[charter anyone?]
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
Gamer
join:2006-12-09
Phoenix, AZ
| said by dvd536  :Oh NO! dont tell me cox is going to start that verislime crap via dns like other providers are doing[charter anyone?] I personally hate any system that breaks DNS, though I can at least live with it if we have alternative servers. |
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs: | reply to coxengr
Could you perhaps post a few examples of just what exactly users are going to see if they screw up the address?
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition." |
|
round_toit
Premium
join:2005-02-01
Pensacola, FL
| Here is what it looks like if I enter dslreports.con |
|
robertfl
Premium
join:2005-10-10
Mary Esther, FL | that's annoying. I would rather see a blank page. Please turn it back off. (looks like Cox is trying to make some money from clicking on the sites)
rob |
|
Gamer
join:2006-12-09
Phoenix, AZ
2 edits | How is that 'helpful'? That's not a redirection to the correct TLD of .com, that's creating a fake TLD and using it for revenue with completely unrelated results.
If Cox is going to begin practices like that, I'd expect rates to start dropping significantly. |
|
robertfl
Premium
join:2005-10-10
Mary Esther, FL | Wrong. They won't decrease our rates.
People need to demand that they turn this crap off. Period. |
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
 ·Cox HSI
|  reply to round_toit
I'm afraid I have to agree that this is a poor showing on Cox's part. I'm not even sure how anyone can claim that that page is more helpful than the standard DNS error page: neither of them suggest ways to get to where you're going, and both say the same thing: that site doesn't exist. The only difference is it looks like this one is loaded down with ads that are going to profit Cox.
Sorry guys, two thumbs down on this one.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition." |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
1 edit | reply to Gamer
said by Gamer :How is that 'helpful'? That's not a redirection to the correct TLD of .com, that's creating a fake TLD and using it for revenue with completely unrelated results. If Cox is going to begin practices like that, I'd expect rates to start dropping significantly. WRONG! Cable bills do NOT go down but most likely revenue generated would go into Cox's CxO's bonus checks!
maybe this is an effort to get many off coxs dns servers as thats whats going to happen[specially with power users]
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
state
stress magnet
Premium,Mod
join:2002-02-08
Hampton, VA
clubs:
Host:
Webhosting
Sonic.net
UK Broadband
Washington & Balti..
UK Chat
| reply to BillRoland
said by BillRoland :I'm not even sure how anyone can claim that that page is more helpful than the standard DNS error page: neither of them suggest ways to get to where you're going, and both say the same thing: that site doesn't exist. I'm gonna have to agree with you there. Since .con isn't even a valid TLD I'd say that the new system is flawed.
I would expect something like this to either suggest a proper top-level domain, or automatically redirect to the top-level domain in question. Hell, strip off the domain suffix and redirect the query to Google and you've got a system that's 1000% better than what you're working on. |
|
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY
Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Home/Office setup ..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
1 edit | reply to BillRoland
They are following in the foot steps of many ISPs. Verisign failed, but the companies that offer this service, and revenue split with the ISPs, are introducing it from the bottom up by stealth.
Unfortunately regular users, who are in the vast majority, do not realize that if they click on one of the links presented as an alternative to their mis-spelling, it usually not the best choice, and is making both Cox and the substitute DNS provider, a few bucks. If they did this a number of times per month then they are potentially worth to Cox twice what their base subscription fee is. I don't think the regular customer realizes this. I think Cox counts on their ignorance.
So in the example above, the mis-typing of dslreports.com is directing regular users to "top-rated-spyware-removers", who are paying to be on that page. They would be better served by Cox if they were redirected to a google search for the domain -- at least the main, non sponsored, page stands a chance of giving them the best possible result instead of whomever pays this DNS redirector the most money to be there!
Its pretty sad really, ISPs just can't get their minds around being a utility and charging directly for pure service. They just have to get greedy, and jump into the conversation somehow. Today, this site and many others now has to pay money to someone in order to continue to reach these customers, tomorrow, we'll have to pay money in order to reach them at maximum possible speed. The day after tomorrow, we'll probably have to pay to reach them at all. |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| reply to state
said by state :said by BillRoland :I'm not even sure how anyone can claim that that page is more helpful than the standard DNS error page: neither of them suggest ways to get to where you're going, and both say the same thing: that site doesn't exist. I'm gonna have to agree with you there. Since .con isn't even a valid TLD I'd say that the new system is flawed. I would expect something like this to either suggest a proper top-level domain, or automatically redirect to the top-level domain in question. Hell, strip off the domain suffix and redirect the query to Google and you've got a system that's 1000% better than what you're working on. This is purely about revenue generation, not an added benefit to the subscribers and to think I just saw a news item that cox is a cable company people dont hate. go ahead with this crap and see how fast that rating tanks
-
»'A Cable Company People Don't Hate'
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| reply to justin
said by justin :They are following in the foot steps of many ISPs. Verisign failed, but the companies that offer this service, and revenue split with the ISPs, are introducing it from the bottom up by stealth. Unfortunately regular users, who are in the vast majority, do not realize that if they click on one of the links presented as an alternative to their mis-spelling, it usually not the best choice, and is making both Cox and the substitute DNS provider, a few bucks. If they did this a number of times per month then they are potentially worth to Cox twice what their base subscription fee is. I don't think the regular customer realizes this. I think Cox counts on their ignorance. So in the example above, the mis-typing of dslreports.com is directing regular users to "top-rated-spyware-removers", who are paying to be on that page. They would be better served by Cox if they were redirected to a google search for the domain -- at least the main, non sponsored, page stands a chance of giving them the best possible result instead of whomever pays this DNS redirector the most money to be there! Its pretty sad really, ISPs just can't get their minds around being a utility and charging directly for pure service. They just have to get greedy, and jump into the conversation somehow. Today, this site and many others now has to pay money to someone in order to continue to reach these customers, tomorrow, we'll have to pay money in order to reach them at maximum possible speed. The day after tomorrow, we'll probably have to pay to reach them at all. Ultimately what its going to come down to is 'pay per click' it all comes down to money. I know providers have a right to make profits but i think this goes too far.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
robertfl
Premium
join:2005-10-10
Mary Esther, FL
 ·Cox VOIP
| Here is my answer - I blocked the page (software wise) I need to get the router to block it totally but no avail. (netgear)
Rob |
|
robertfl
Premium
join:2005-10-10
Mary Esther, FL | I also wonder if this is an example of net neutrality?
Rob |
|
state
stress magnet
Premium,Mod
join:2002-02-08
Hampton, VA
clubs:
Host:
Webhosting
Sonic.net
UK Broadband
Washington & Balti..
UK Chat
| reply to dvd536
said by dvd536 :Ultimately what its going to come down to is 'pay per click' it all comes down to money. Yep.
Point your DNS servers at 68.105.28.13 and 68.105.29.13 or visit »finder.cox.net and type in a search term...like "google" (results here - none even go to Google!).
When you get the results, check out the page source in your browser....you'll see that the redirects all go through overture.com which is a Yahoo! search marketing product: »www.content.overture.com/d/ |
|
state
stress magnet
Premium,Mod
join:2002-02-08
Hampton, VA
clubs:
Host:
Webhosting
Sonic.net
UK Broadband
Washington & Balti..
UK Chat
| reply to robertfl
said by robertfl :I also wonder if this is an example of net neutrality? Rob No Rob...this isn't. See: »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality for a proper explanation. |
|
