H. D. Lee wrote: > On 2002.09.24_21:26:59_+0000, Sean wrote: > >>I'm using Dachstein. TinyDNS is on the CD. Guess I'll try to set it >>up. Thanks for the pointers! Another question: Is this a GOOD IDEA? >>It can be done, but should it be done? >> > > > Depends on what you and your users needs. On some sites I worked on, > they really want ad free pages (and some cencorship). Pages come up very > fast, etc. etc. For that, they used specific apps cooperating with > squid proxy (redirector), like squirm or squidguard. Junkbuster is > another good alternative that comes to my mind that have that exact > function. > > The benefit of using such apps is flexibility, ...
I've seen a lot of that www.blahblahblah.org/ads/* too. In fact, I get more ads from creative urls than from doubleclick. The problem with filtering ads is that some big money companies that have a lot invested in their site, like financial ones, tie the loading of their pages into the successful loading of the ads and the responses the adserver gives. So when blocking doubleclick, sometimes your page will wait minutes to timeout and finish loading, if it even does. The users will function best if they can have some control of when/who to block ads from. If they can't adjust the rules that apply to them, a diverse user base will revolt against the best ad blocking software, perhaps. Donuts in the morning and pizza later on has been known to quash the rebellion. What I've found makes my surfing experience reasonably calm is disabling javascript from opening windows I don't request, using Mozilla's preferences, Advanced --> Windows and Scripting. > On the other hand, some sites just don't want restricted accesses, even > to speed their web experience, or their user bases are just too complex. > Like ISP. Or an .edu. And on the subject of dnscache and loading it up, people often wonder about extending the TTL, time to live, of the cached data so that the entry is available for longer. How bout a week? Well it turns out to be a bad idea apparently, because the whole DNS scheme is centered around timeouts on the order of a 1/2 hour, at least the responses you get from various servers are. It's rare to see it over 3hrs. Now you can set a TTL on your cache, but there's TTLs on each entry that came with the entry, and the TTL that came with the entry takes precedent over the global value you can set on your cache. Your 1 week TTL you placed on the cache will never get a chance to get used, becuase the 1/2 hr - 3 hr TTL entry on each data will expire them long before a week ever rolls around. It's better this way so that when a server at some ip address goes down, it's dns entry can be changed to point to a new ip address, and basically nobody will cache the old address for more than 3 hrs. But you guys knew that already, I'm sure. And finally, you can increase the size of your dnscache to greater than the 2 MB that's set aside for it in your conf files. I still haven't found a way to determine my cache size on the fly. So I never know if it's near 2MB. If I was handling a busy site, it might be something to think about. Those djbutils become more useful then. Regards, Matthew ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ------------------------------------------------------------------------ leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
