<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CNET reports: ISPs aren&#8217;t very good at DNS</title>
	<link>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/</link>
	<description>Making the Internet safer and faster</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:53:20 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Hyper123.net &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Verizon is dropping a lot of DNS requests</title>
		<link>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-133760</link>
		<author>Hyper123.net &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Verizon is dropping a lot of DNS requests</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Dec 2007 04:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-133760</guid>
		<description>[...] read more &#124; digg story   Tags: DNS, Verizon [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] read more | digg story   Tags: DNS, Verizon [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cr::blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Verizon drops 3.14% of all DNS requests</title>
		<link>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-656</link>
		<author>cr::blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Verizon drops 3.14% of all DNS requests</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Aug 2006 04:40:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-656</guid>
		<description>[...] From a post over at the OpenDNS Blog, most ISP&#8217;s are not providing good DNS service. Big shocker. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] From a post over at the OpenDNS Blog, most ISP&#8217;s are not providing good DNS service. Big shocker. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul</title>
		<link>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-655</link>
		<author>Paul</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Aug 2006 04:30:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-655</guid>
		<description>At my last company, we had Verizon Business DSL.  For two weeks solid we had constant DNS issues, as did a lot of the internet (according to a large amount of complaint posts on dslreports).  Verizon denied that there was any issues on their end, so we ended up going with Speakeasy DSL (small company, 7 people) and never looked back.

I too was a speakeasy customer at home (before I moved).  Wonderful company.

Verizon is a joke.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At my last company, we had Verizon Business DSL.  For two weeks solid we had constant DNS issues, as did a lot of the internet (according to a large amount of complaint posts on dslreports).  Verizon denied that there was any issues on their end, so we ended up going with Speakeasy DSL (small company, 7 people) and never looked back.</p>
<p>I too was a speakeasy customer at home (before I moved).  Wonderful company.</p>
<p>Verizon is a joke.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rudi Pittman</title>
		<link>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-654</link>
		<author>Rudi Pittman</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Aug 2006 02:47:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-654</guid>
		<description>I would love to have opendns store a username or a cookie so that my settings "stick"...I'm also on a dynamic ip that gets dropped alot so everytime it does I revert to default settings which are still good but I prefer the .cm to .com fix which is not a default anymore.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would love to have opendns store a username or a cookie so that my settings &#8220;stick&#8221;&#8230;I&#8217;m also on a dynamic ip that gets dropped alot so everytime it does I revert to default settings which are still good but I prefer the .cm to .com fix which is not a default anymore.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zak</title>
		<link>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-650</link>
		<author>Zak</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2006 21:06:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-650</guid>
		<description>I just noticed OpenDNS through this article and it looks interesting.  Out of curiousity, how would I mirror DNS information (either from this project or another server) and run a DNS server on my own network?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just noticed OpenDNS through this article and it looks interesting.  Out of curiousity, how would I mirror DNS information (either from this project or another server) and run a DNS server on my own network?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stu</title>
		<link>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-645</link>
		<author>stu</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2006 13:01:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-645</guid>
		<description>There is a distinction that I'm missing with this article.  What tests are being conducted?  Is this simply a test from a client of the network or at the server itself.  DNS typically uses UDP which is a best effort service and, yes, you will get packet loss in this case.  If you're simply looking at it from the client side and you don't really know what the server is doing, you might be blaming the wrong thing.  

Any more info on this before you spread the FUD too far?

stu =)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a distinction that I&#8217;m missing with this article.  What tests are being conducted?  Is this simply a test from a client of the network or at the server itself.  DNS typically uses UDP which is a best effort service and, yes, you will get packet loss in this case.  If you&#8217;re simply looking at it from the client side and you don&#8217;t really know what the server is doing, you might be blaming the wrong thing.  </p>
<p>Any more info on this before you spread the FUD too far?</p>
<p>stu =)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed Cooper</title>
		<link>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-644</link>
		<author>Ed Cooper</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2006 12:39:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-644</guid>
		<description>David, good idea, but many of us have quite dynamic IPs, Im not really sure how your settings system intends to work with those, I think its important to get the best settings as the default, and also to detect dynamic ips, so as the service grows as our IPs change we don't keep getting Open DNS in different modes so to speak.  Looking forward to the London hosts!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David, good idea, but many of us have quite dynamic IPs, Im not really sure how your settings system intends to work with those, I think its important to get the best settings as the default, and also to detect dynamic ips, so as the service grows as our IPs change we don&#8217;t keep getting Open DNS in different modes so to speak.  Looking forward to the London hosts!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Ulevitch</title>
		<link>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-640</link>
		<author>David Ulevitch</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2006 06:11:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-640</guid>
		<description>Lane,

That's a good comment.  I think we'd be wise to let users pick the search engine that handled our page too.  I'll see what we can do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lane,</p>
<p>That&#8217;s a good comment.  I think we&#8217;d be wise to let users pick the search engine that handled our page too.  I&#8217;ll see what we can do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lane</title>
		<link>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-639</link>
		<author>Lane</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2006 06:07:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-639</guid>
		<description>I really find this service you guys are offering to be a big community service of sorts.  What I don't understand is why you haven't offered us the option to search google when the domain is typed wrong.  Don't take this the wrong way but your search page isn't the best known and an unknowing user would assume they had been redirected to a spyware site.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I really find this service you guys are offering to be a big community service of sorts.  What I don&#8217;t understand is why you haven&#8217;t offered us the option to search google when the domain is typed wrong.  Don&#8217;t take this the wrong way but your search page isn&#8217;t the best known and an unknowing user would assume they had been redirected to a spyware site.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pd</title>
		<link>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-633</link>
		<author>pd</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2006 02:00:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.opendns.com/2006/08/17/cnet-reports-isps-arent-very-good-at-dns/#comment-633</guid>
		<description>Add to that list TPG in Australia, their DNS servers routinely fell over at 1am nightly thus resulting in me maintaining my HOSTS file with 50+ entries. This was over 2 years ago as since then I changed ISP's purely on their lack of response to my complaints and general bad service.

If only OpenDNS was around back then!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Add to that list TPG in Australia, their DNS servers routinely fell over at 1am nightly thus resulting in me maintaining my HOSTS file with 50+ entries. This was over 2 years ago as since then I changed ISP&#8217;s purely on their lack of response to my complaints and general bad service.</p>
<p>If only OpenDNS was around back then!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
