🚀 go-pugleaf

"Warren H." <wholzem@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:vQcQ7.15019$ER5.265784@rwcrnsc52...
> Jeff wrote:
> > I found a better solution (and the reason why we need a solution at
> > all) regarding the recent DNS problems. As it turns out, AT&T *is*
> > actually serving up DNS!! Problem is, they're changing which server is
> > doing this *very* often - much more often than Windows 2000 or XP
> > expects it.
>
> ROFLO!  Re-read what you just wrote. When you say "much more often than
> Windows 2000 or XP expects it", do you mean more often than once every 4
> days? My lease is for 4 days. Are you saying that they change DNS servers
> more often than that? Then explain why it wouldn't affect other OS's?
>

 Hmm, my lease seems to be for 24 hours.
 win 2K Pro, SP2

> > Seems that these latest flavors of Windows have a little
> > service running known as "DNS caching". It's supposed to lock onto a
> > DNS server (dynamically assigned, in AT&T's case) and use that server
> > for the next 300 seconds (the default setting - hackable in the
> > registry). The idea is, if your machine doesn't have to sense which
> > DNS server is being assigned to it each time you click a link, your
> > online experience should be marginally faster. Problem is, AT&T is
> > probably switching between DNS servers faster than the expected 300
> > seconds and this explains why I can only get to about 7 sites at a
> > time. If I leave it alone for a few minutes, I can grab another few
> > pages - or I can force this process by refreshing my connection.
>
> Okay. Let's try a better explaination:
>
> AT&T is sending along up to 4 server addresses for DNS servers when you
get
> your lease. Only the first two work. When Windows 9x/ME/NT come to the
ones
> that don't work, they cycle through to the ones that do work. Windows
> 2000/XP stay "stuck" on the bad server for 5 minutes.
>
> There are at least four ways we can overcome this problem until AT&T fixes
> it.
>
> 1. Hack the Registry, to reduce the caching time to near zero, effectively
> turning off DNS caching. (Will you remember to undo this hack when the
time
> comes?)
>
> 2. Go into Services and disable DNS caching. (Setting it to manual simply
> stops it from loading at boot, but it will load when an application asks
for
> it to load.)
>
> 3. Specify only the two working DNS servers in the connection settings.
>
> 4. Specify the router (if you're using one) as your only DNS server in the
> connection settings. (The router doesn't get "stuck" on the bad server.)
>
>
> Each method has it's pro's and con's. If you're looking to save every
> micro-milli-nano second you can, option 3 has a slight edge. If you're
> concerned that the real DNS servers will change soon, option number 4
would
> be the best. If you want to just forget about using DNS caching, then
> options 1 and 2 will do that, but option 2 is probably better than option
1
> because it actually turns the feature off rather than just crippling it.
>
> My personal choice would be 3 or 4, depending upon whether you have a
> router, and if that router will actually handle DNS resolution.
>
> --
> Warren H.
>
> ==========
> Disclaimer: My views reflect those of myself, and not my employer, my
> friends, nor (as she often tells me) my wife. Any resemblance to the views
> of anybody living or dead is coincidental. No animals were hurt in the
> writing of this response -- unless you count my dog who desperately wants
to
> go outside now.
>
>
>
>