Comcast, dynamic DNS service
Anybody here been getting bugged by comcast to change their DNS settings to accept dynamic DNS server assigmment from Comcast? They seem pretty insistent about it. Emails of course, but snail mail and a phone call? Anybody know whats going on? (I stopped using Comcast DNS a while back, waiting for two minuts to get a DNS request back seemed a bit long.) -- Jeff Kinz, Emergent Research, Hudson, MA. Speech Recognition Technology was used to create this e-mail ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Comcast, dynamic DNS service
Yes, they have sent me several emails and snail mail, I haven't done anything about it yet though.. -- Original message -- From: Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anybody here been getting bugged by comcast to change their DNS settings to accept dynamic DNS server assigmment from Comcast? They seem pretty insistent about it. Emails of course, but snail mail and a phone call? Anybody know whats going on? (I stopped using Comcast DNS a while back, waiting for two minuts to get a DNS request back seemed a bit long.) -- Jeff Kinz, Emergent Research, Hudson, MA. Speech Recognition Technology was used to create this e-mail ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Comcast, dynamic DNS service
On 4/3/06, Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anybody here been getting bugged by comcast to change their DNS settings to accept dynamic DNS server assigmment from Comcast? From what I've been able to gather via Google Groups for Comcast DNS dynamic, this is a notification that Comcast is taking some of their older full-service resolvers (DNS servers) offline. If you've manually configured your client resolver (network settings) to use those servers, you will need to manually update your configuration as well. The typical customer who uses DHCP to configure their resolver would never notice. Since you state you're not using Comcast's resolvers at all, you shouldn't notice, either. Unless Comcast is planning on blocking UDP port 53. I've encountered ISPs who do that. Never could figure out why. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Comcast, dynamic DNS service
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 02:20:28PM -0400, Ben Scott wrote: On 4/3/06, Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anybody here been getting bugged by comcast to change their DNS settings to accept dynamic DNS server assigmment from Comcast? From what I've been able to gather via Google Groups for Comcast DNS dynamic, this is a notification that Comcast is taking some of their older full-service resolvers (DNS servers) offline. If you've manually configured your client resolver (network settings) to use those servers, you will need to manually update your configuration as well. The typical customer who uses DHCP to configure their resolver would never notice. Since you state you're not using Comcast's resolvers at all, you shouldn't notice, either. Unless Comcast is planning on blocking UDP port 53. I've encountered ISPs who do that. Never could figure out why. Up on dslreports forums some people are claiming that other ISP complained to Comcast that C. customers where dragging down the other ISP DNS severs since so many were using them. They speculated that would be a reason to block or redirect some DNS traffic. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss -- Jeff Kinz, Emergent Research, Hudson, MA. Speech Recognition Technology was used to create this e-mail ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Comcast, dynamic DNS service
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 14:35 -0400, Jeff Kinz wrote: Up on dslreports forums some people are claiming that other ISP complained to Comcast that C. customers where dragging down the other ISP DNS severs since so many were using them. They speculated that would be a reason to block or redirect some DNS traffic. Am I misunderstanding? Other providers are upset because folks outside their network are using their DNS servers? If this is such a problem, it begs the question, Why don't they just filter out requests that don't come from their own customers? -- Cole Tuininga [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Comcast, dynamic DNS service
On 4/3/06, Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unless Comcast is planning on blocking UDP port 53.I'veencountered ISPs who do that.Never could figure out why.I've worked places where corporate does that. You can't nslookup www.blockedbyproxy.com and use the IP in your browser instead of the name. It makes it easier to filter most users.I don't think it's very effective as there are ways around it, but if it stops a big chunk it may be worthwhile to corporate. -- A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures.- Daniel Webster
Re: Comcast, dynamic DNS service
On 4/3/06, Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Up on dslreports forums some people are claiming that other ISP complained to Comcast that C. customers where dragging down the other ISP DNS severs since so many were using them. Ummm http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/ch7/queries.html#allow-query My experience with the dslreports forums is that they can be useful to get one started looking for something, but ultimately distribute more misinformation than your average Iraqi information minister... They speculated that would be a reason to block or redirect some DNS traffic. The only reason I can think of to block UDP 53 would be some kind of widespread DDoS attack against the root or GTLD servers, and even then, that would likely be a temporary measure. (The root's briefly blocked ping for a little due to that reason.) -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Comcast, dynamic DNS service
On 4/3/06, Tom Buskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've worked places where corporate does that. Well, sure. Corporate environments are an entirely different animal. Where I work, we don't allow any direct IP connection to the outside world. You have to go through a proxy server that requires user authentication. But we're talking home ISPs here. They're not protecting corporate assets. In theory, they should have *some* reason for blocking something. :) -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Comcast, dynamic DNS service
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 03:37:58PM -0400, Ben Scott wrote: On 4/3/06, Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Up on dslreports forums some people are claiming that other ISP complained to Comcast that C. customers where dragging down the other ISP DNS severs since so many were using them. Ummm http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/ch7/queries.html#allow-query My experience with the dslreports forums is that they can be useful to get one started looking for something, but ultimately distribute more misinformation than your average Iraqi information minister... That sounds like an accurate assessment. :-) They speculated that would be a reason to block or redirect some DNS traffic. The only reason I can think of to block UDP 53 would be some kind of widespread DDoS attack against the root or GTLD servers, and even then, that would likely be a temporary measure. (The root's briefly blocked ping for a little due to that reason.) -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss -- Jeff Kinz, Emergent Research, Hudson, MA. Speech Recognition Technology was used to create this e-mail ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
