Comcast, dynamic DNS service

[jkinz-3]

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

[matt galster-2]

> 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
>

They've been bothering me, too.  Unless they run a split DNS (internal has
a different view than external) I'll stay the way I am.  I run a caching
DNS that starts by looking at the root servers.

MEG

[jkinz-3]

On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 02:04:48PM -0400, mattg@... wrote:

> > 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?
> >
>
> They've been bothering me, too.  Unless they run a split DNS (internal has
> a different view than external) I'll stay the way I am.  I run a caching
> DNS that starts by looking at the root servers.

My deepest concern is that they will either block or transparently proxy
all outbound udp on port 53 to their servers.  (or somesuch)





--
Jeff Kinz, Emergent Research, Hudson, MA.
Speech Recognition Technology was used to create this e-mail

[Christopher Schmidt]

On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 02:21:41PM -0400, Jeff Kinz wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 02:04:48PM -0400, mattg@... wrote:
> > > 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?
> > >
> >
> > They've been bothering me, too.  Unless they run a split DNS (internal has
> > a different view than external) I'll stay the way I am.  I run a caching
> > DNS that starts by looking at the root servers.
>
> My deepest concern is that they will either block or transparently proxy
> all outbound udp on port 53 to their servers.  (or somesuch)

A bigger concern would be that they would do this, then use their
position to create 'members only' services for comcast users, under a
non-public TLD like '.cable' or something similar. They could provide a
wide variety of services -- everything from their current searching
services (a la
http://www.comcast.net/qry/websearch/?query=myrtle+baptist+church&cmd=qry&safe=on&x=11&y=14
) to streaming media downloads -- but provided that they did things
right, they would never have to share these things with non comcast
customers.

Rather, it's not my concern that they'll do that -- I'm a speakeasy
customer, and I certainly don't begrudge them the ability to use their
position to enhance their customer experience -- but that they would do
so in a way that would make it impossible for users *not* using comcast
DNS to get these services, since I don't like the idea of corporations
ignoring some of their customer base simply because they use a
different, perfectly acceptable technical solution to avoid a well known
issue that Comcast has had in the past (being unable to provide stable
DNS).

--
Christopher Schmidt
Web Developer

[Ward Vandewege]

On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 02:37:36PM -0400, Christopher Schmidt wrote:
> A bigger concern would be that they would do this, then use their
> position to create 'members only' services for comcast users, under a
> non-public TLD like '.cable' or something similar. They could provide a
> wide variety of services -- everything from their current searching
> services (a la
> http://www.comcast.net/qry/websearch/?query=myrtle+baptist+church&cmd=qry&safe=on&x=11&y=14
> ) to streaming media downloads -- but provided that they did things
> right, they would never have to share these things with non comcast
> customers.

Yeah - I recently came across a Canadian ISP that does this for POP3/IMAP
(!). I just couldn't believe it - here is this Canadian, travelling with her
laptop somewhere in Europe. She wants to check her e-mail with her mail
client, and _her ISP simply does not allow it_ outside its own network.  She
had to use the ISP's (crappy) webmail. Reasoning: according to the ISP's
website, security. I really wonder what the ISP is afraid of - third parties
stealing their customers e-mail? It just does not make sense.

Needless to say I recommended that she changes ISP. I can't remember the
ISP's name but it was a big one...

Ward.

--
Pong.be         -(  There are only 10 kinds of people in the world. Those  )-
Virtual hosting -(   who understand binary, and those who don't. -- Bear   )-
http://pong.be  -(                                                         )-
GnuPG public key: http://gpg.dtype.org

[Matthew Gillen]

On 04/03/2006 03:19 PM, Ward Vandewege wrote:

> Yeah - I recently came across a Canadian ISP that does this for POP3/IMAP
> (!). I just couldn't believe it - here is this Canadian, travelling with her
> laptop somewhere in Europe. She wants to check her e-mail with her mail
> client, and _her ISP simply does not allow it_ outside its own network.  She
> had to use the ISP's (crappy) webmail. Reasoning: according to the ISP's
> website, security. I really wonder what the ISP is afraid of - third parties
> stealing their customers e-mail? It just does not make sense.
>
> Needless to say I recommended that she changes ISP. I can't remember the
> ISP's name but it was a big one...

It's beyond me why anyone would use their ISP-provided email for anything but
interacting with the ISP anyway.  It's as much a vendor-lock-in mechanism as a
"service" provided to the customer...

Matt
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Bill Bogstad]

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Matthew Gillen <me@...> wrote:

> On 04/03/2006 03:19 PM, Ward Vandewege wrote:
>> Yeah - I recently came across a Canadian ISP that does this for POP3/IMAP
>> (!). I just couldn't believe it - here is this Canadian, travelling with her
>> laptop somewhere in Europe. She wants to check her e-mail with her mail
>> client, and _her ISP simply does not allow it_ outside its own network.  She
>> had to use the ISP's (crappy) webmail. Reasoning: according to the ISP's
>> website, security. I really wonder what the ISP is afraid of - third parties
>> stealing their customers e-mail? It just does not make sense.
>>
>> Needless to say I recommended that she changes ISP. I can't remember the
>> ISP's name but it was a big one...
>
> It's beyond me why anyone would use their ISP-provided email for anything but
> interacting with the ISP anyway.  It's as much a vendor-lock-in mechanism as a
> "service" provided to the customer...

Which is why I've had a $20 a year pobox.com email forwarding address
for over ten years now.
Currently, I use gmail to actually read/send mail.  I normally use the
web interface, but sometimes use IMAP clients.   I can switch to a
different mail provider (or my own server) quickly without having to
update my address with the world.  It's worth the <$2 a month for that
piece of mind.

Given the longevity of my address, I get lots of spam directed there.
So far Google does a pretty
good job of dumping it into my spam box.  I only see 2-4 messages a
day of spam that are
false negatives.   And one or two false positives a week.  Yes, I
routinely skim my spam folder.
That's when I use IMAP.  I start up my client and let it download all
the headers from my spam folder.  I then quickly skim the
senders/subjects.  The roundtrip time via gmail's web interface to do
this is just too slow to switch screens.

Bill Bogstad

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Ethan Schwartz-2]

On Oct 8, 2009, at 9:51 AM, Bill Bogstad <bogstad@...> wrote:

>
> Which is why I've had a $20 a year pobox.com email forwarding address
> for over ten years now.
> Currently, I use gmail to actually read/send mail.  I normally use the
> web interface, but sometimes use IMAP clients.   I can switch to a
> different mail provider (or my own server) quickly without having to
> update my address with the world.  It's worth the <$2 a month for that
> piece of mind.
>
> Given the longevity of my address, I get lots of spam directed there.
> So far Google does a pretty
> good job of dumping it into my spam box.  I only see 2-4 messages a
> day of spam that are
> false negatives.   And one or two false positives a week.  Yes, I
> routinely skim my spam folder.
> That's when I use IMAP.  I start up my client and let it download all
> the headers from my spam folder.  I then quickly skim the
> senders/subjects.  The roundtrip time via gmail's web interface to do
> this is just too slow to switch screens.
>
> Bill Bogstad
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@...
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Directnic.com will let you set up email forwarding for domains you  
register with them--both individual addresses and wildcards--last time  
I renewed it was $15/yr

I've been using them for 5+ years for my "name" domain fr email only.  
They also redirect web requests for the domain as well.

Ethan
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Jack Coats at coats.org]

My topical typo for them is M$N.com :)
><> ... Jack


On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:50 PM, John Chambers <jc@...> wrote:

> Oops! I just noticed that I missed a fat-finger typo, referring to msn.comas
> man.com.   Oh,  well;  'a'  is  just  one key off from 's'.  Actually, out
> of
> curiosity, I checked and found that there is a man.com site. It seems to
> be a
> gay  men's site that advertises it self as a "search site".  Somehow, I
> doubt
> they did what I said they did.  OTOH,  msn.com  has  developed  a  bit  of
>  a
> reputation for sleazy business practices.  No surprise, I guess.  ;-)
>
> Sometimes you find fun things when you mistype a host name. F'r instance,
> why
> would  what's  obviously a site targeting gay men have "Men Seeking Women"
> as
> one of the items in their nav list? To show that they don't discriminate?
>  Oh
> well, it's off topic here.
>
> | Matthew Gillen wrote:
> | | It's beyond me why anyone would use their ISP-provided email for
> anything but
> | | interacting with the ISP anyway.  It's as much a vendor-lock-in
> mechanism as a
> | | "service" provided to the customer...
> |
> | In some cases, it's because they want to be  able  to  look  at  your
>  email.
> | Remember a few years ago, when man.com was caught picking photos out of
> their
> | customers' email and web sites, and using them in advertising?  It really
> hit
> | the  fan  when people found out, and they agreed to stop doing it.  But
> first
> | they tried justifying it by saying it was legal because they stated in
>  their
> | Terms  of  Service  (ToS)  document  that  any files stored on their
> machines
> | became msn.com's property.
> |
> | Fact is that the management, especially  the  marketers,  at  many
>  companies
> | consider  anything  they can trick you into "giving" to them is theirs to
> use
> | in any way they feel. If they can make a profit selling information from
> your
> | files, they feel that it's their right to do so. Some of them even argue
> that
> | they have an obligation to their shareholders to do so.  This should be
>  good
> | enough ground to avoid any "service" that puts your files on their
> machines.
>
> --
> There are three kinds of people in this world,
> those who count and those who don't.
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@...
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Bill Horne-14]

John Chambers wrote:
> Sometimes you find fun things when you mistype a host name.

Try goodle.com ...

--
E. William Horne
William Warren Consulting
Computer & Network Installations, Security, and Service
http://william-warren.com
781-784-7287


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss