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?]

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.

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.

said by state :

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.

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.

said by robertfl :

I also wonder if this is an example of net neutrality?

Rob

said by dvd536 :

Ultimately what its going to come down to is 'pay per click' it all comes down to money.

said by state :

... check out the page source in your browser....you'll see that the redirects all go through overture.com ...

said by round_toit :

...
Notice this is not the "Enhanced version" that Coxengr talked about. In the upper right hand corner it says "Enhance error results page".

said by THZNDUP :

And what should the Cox 'Enhanced version' of DNS do? If you get the syntax correct, should it take you to the page requested? If you misspell it or it doesn't exist, will it take you to an 'Enhanced error results page' maybe?

If you reread the OP, you should find that page is in fact what CoxEng was talking about. It substitutes a normal DNS error 'Page Not Found' with the one you posted. In fact he spells out 'enhanced error results' several times.

BTW, using Google as a DNS filter works pretty good. At least it almost always does a better job at speeling than I do.......

In fact he spells out 'enhanced error results' several times.

said by round_toit :

I wonder how many "team sessions" were wasted arriving at this piece of junk. I bet they already have the PR team creating advertising for TV espousing this miraculous new feature.

said by keeska :

This trick Cox is trying to pull makes it obvious they are not interested in providing a good service at a fair price.

said by fatness :

Earthlink began something similar last August: »Oh No They Didn't!

Unfortunately they didn't even offer the opt-out options until September, after enough complaints built up. »blogs.earthlink.net/2006/09/more···andl.php

said by coxengr :

Again - for those that don't personally like this, there's an opt out option that's "RFC compliant". It will go away and you don't have to see any of it.

said by krod :

IE has this functionally already, it goes to MSN doesnt it?
FF has it too, most are off by default. whyy not change this setting with the cox install software?... that way only the true people needing handholding get this functionality.

said by needforspeed59 :

You know, for all the complaining and concerns about this test, at least Cox is putting out there for feedback.

said by robertfl :

If Cox wants to climate spam on a network level, then they need to stop this shit. Because if a customer hits an infected site using IE...BOOM (and yes, that CAN happen)

-Rob

said by Gamer :

And if they don't update Windows, it probably already has happened, regardless of the browser they use; I doubt those users would update Firefox either. What that has to do with this thread, however, is beyond me.