Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Demonized]

No, I'm not from  Dlink. Do you see a Dlink sign next to my name like all other Dlink techs have?
Because 'somewhere' in this forum Lycan has already confirmed that it doesn't do caching. regarding your other inquisits: do you want to validate the validation of the validation? Do you want tot know what colour underwear the programmer wore that day?

If you want to talk bits, bytes and code you're in the wrong place, even the Dlink moderators are not the coders.

[GullyFoyle]

No, I'm not from  Dlink. Do you see a Dlink sign next to my name like all other Dlink techs have?
Because 'somewhere' in this forum Lycan has already confirmed that it doesn't do caching. regarding your other inquisits: do you want to validate the validation of the validation? Do you want tot know what colour underwear the programmer wore that day?

If you want to talk bits, bytes and code you're in the wrong place, even the Dlink moderators are not the coders.

So this forum is essentially useless with an uneducated D-link flack answering posts whenever he feels like it?
Then what is the point of any questions being posted here? Just to piss and moan?
That strikes me as useless.
And if I understand the history DNS RELAY was once DNS CACHE, then it got name changed. Then the D-Link employee claimed there is no caching. No reason was stated for the change. No information was given about how caching turned into relay. Nothing tangible except some employees talking points.
Does that sum it up?
And best of all the D-Link working slob has no idea about coding.
Strikes me as Pat Robertson being an expert on Homosexual Witchcraft.
Anyway if there are no specific answers from the company then why should anyone post ever?

[mackworth]

So this forum is essentially useless with an uneducated D-link flack answering posts whenever he feels like it?
Then what is the point of any questions being posted here? Just to piss and moan?
That strikes me as useless.
And if I understand the history DNS RELAY was once DNS CACHE, then it got name changed. Then the D-Link employee claimed there is no caching. No reason was stated for the change. No information was given about how caching turned into relay. Nothing tangible except some employees talking points.
Does that sum it up?
And best of all the D-Link working slob has no idea about coding.
Strikes me as Pat Robertson being an expert on Homosexual Witchcraft.
Anyway if there are no specific answers from the company then why should anyone post ever?

Just be clear, I am not saying this router ever had something called DNS Caching.  I merely meant that I was pretty sure that previous D-link models had it.  But now, the 655 and 825 have something called DNS relay.

BTW, there are employees that post here and they are as helpful as they can be.  They just seem to be MIA at the moment.

[mackworth]

So does the fact that it may not be releasing fast enough.
D-link doesn't look to be responding. Others think it caches. Just because D-link changed the term doesn't mean it doesn't cache. Enhanced Interrogation technique is still Torture despite the fancy name.
Right now it doesn't seem to work. Turn it off. If D-link screwed it up they should simply remove it.
But even with it off I still occasionally get what looks to be NAT overflow.
DNS relay is not the cause of that.
If we had access to NAT settings we could experiment and see if it solves the problem.
Instead I have to reboot.
Or maybe it interferes with the OS DNS cache service. I had an XP machine I had to keep the service off on otherwise it would freeze my net access.
This thread keeps repeating the same accusations with no new information or perspective. If someone can explain just why the router freezes, weak cpu and memory for example, or why DNS relay fails maybe then it becomes a cornerstone to work from.
My assumption is release times are screwed up or NAT table isn't large enough most likely both. When D-link disproves that and offers their own explanation I may move on. But I don't really trust any company to be honest about defects in their product.

Basically my point is that this thread is about a specific issue, if you read it from the beginning.  This issue is somehow DNS relay related which was first mentioned on page 4.  If you think you have another issue when DNS relay is turned off and NAT overflow, then please start a new thread.

[GullyFoyle]

Just be clear, I am not saying this router ever had something called DNS Caching.  I merely meant that I was pretty sure that previous D-link models had it.  But now, the 655 and 825 have something called DNS relay.

BTW, there are employees that post here and they are as helpful as they can be.  They just seem to be MIA at the moment.

First. Other sources, reliable trustworthy third party sources, claimed that DNS relay was cached.
Second. Helpful and informed are two different things. C'mon they are company men. Look at the whole Nvidia gpu fiasco and how to avoid recall solutions were to stretch serviceability to beyond warranty.
Third. No one knows just what is the problem, can you point to any employee post stating exactly the source and solution?
My choices for source of problem are either slow release time, small NAT table, or deficient cpu/memory.
The first two can be addressed in a firmware update allowing us to change NAT table size and release time for both NAT table and DNS caching. If it is cpu/memory then the product is not capable of fully applying itself to optimal usage and specific operating parameters should be offered so that capacity may be realized and not exceeded.
Anyone else have any ideas?
Please share them and hope someone from D-link corrects our errors in assumption if not judgment.

[GullyFoyle]

Basically my point is that this thread is about a specific issue, if you read it from the beginning.  This issue is somehow DNS relay related which was first mentioned on page 4.  If you think you have another issue when DNS relay is turned off and NAT overflow, then please start a new thread.

Can you prove that NAT table overflow is NOT the source of the problem?
Do you have any idea what the source is?
Please share with the class.

[mackworth]

Can you prove that NAT table overflow is NOT the source of the problem?
Do you have any idea what the source is?
Please share with the class.

Thats the whole point.  You can't prove its the nat table so stop trying to make it sound like you know what you are talking about.  All we know is this:

This problem started in 1.22B05 which fixed an issue with DNS relay
The only solution that has worked for people with this issue is to turn off DNS relay
This problem also happens in firmware 1.11 of the DIR-825
This happens on all revisions

So based on the part 1 and 2, I am just saying it probably has something to do dns relay.  I am not basing my argument on bs, I just saying that it makes sense the issue is dns relay related.  get it?

[mackworth]

First. Other sources, reliable trustworthy third party sources, claimed that DNS relay was cached.
Second. Helpful and informed are two different things. C'mon they are company men. Look at the whole Nvidia gpu fiasco and how to avoid recall solutions were to stretch serviceability to beyond warranty.
Third. No one knows just what is the problem, can you point to any employee post stating exactly the source and solution?
My choices for source of problem are either slow release time, small NAT table, or deficient cpu/memory.
The first two can be addressed in a firmware update allowing us to change NAT table size and release time for both NAT table and DNS caching. If it is cpu/memory then the product is not capable of fully applying itself to optimal usage and specific operating parameters should be offered so that capacity may be realized and not exceeded.
Anyone else have any ideas?
Please share them and hope someone from D-link corrects our errors in assumption if not judgment.

I checked those links you posted, maybe I missed something, but I didn't see anything anywhere that said the dir-655 has or had ever had dns caching.  There was one guy that posted a generic definition of dns relay that mentioned caching but he offered no proof.  All I am saying if that it was discussed here before and it was decided that it didn't and documentation doesn;t mention caching at all, although I think i checked documentation for an old dlink router that specifically mentioned that it did have caching, leading me to believe if they left it out of the 655 docs, that it doesn;t have it.

I am not saying I know everything, I just making conclusions based on evidence presented in this forum, not posts from dslreports about completely different routers.  Dlink has already said they can not reproduce it.  I am just trying to share the one solution that has worked for people.

[Demonized]

So this forum is essentially useless with an uneducated D-link flack answering posts whenever he feels like it? Then what is the point of any questions being posted here? Just to piss and moan?
That strikes me as useless.

Did I say uneducated? I merely said they are not product management, not coders and not VP's of Dlink. Your question tend to sound like "i'd like to speak to the manager".

And if I understand the history DNS RELAY was once DNS CACHE, then it got name changed. Then the D-Link employee claimed there is no caching. No reason was stated for the change. No information was given about how caching turned into relay. Nothing tangible except some employees talking points.
Does that sum it up?

How about: they changes the name because "DNS caching" gave the wrong impression to users since there was no caching at all? Or is there a conspiracy behind this?

And best of all the D-Link working slob has no idea about coding.
Strikes me as Pat Robertson being an expert on Homosexual Witchcraft.
Anyway if there are no specific answers from the company then why should anyone post ever?

You haven't paid much attention to the board ...

[GullyFoyle]

Demonized, just why are you defending the company?
You own stock?
You dating the bosses daughter?
Or do you think they care about you other than to rake in your cash?
Really why would anyone defend a company that offers half fixed updates? Or half broken depending on how you look at it.
Oh and since the CODING guys you mentioned earlier would know the difference between CACHING and RELAYING you can bet that CACHING was and possibly still is in use.

Mackdaddy, the forum was specific to the DIR-655 and DSLREPORTS is about as reliable as they come.
Maybe you should read more carefully, it could be the source of your misunderstanding.
What you missed.

[Help Me] DIR-655 DNS Relay

I'll ask again: What do either of you consider to be the problem with the router? Not just the nebulous DNS relay, but WHY the DNS relay causes the freeze. Why the router will freeze even with DNS relay off?
Surely you must have some opinion, theory or best guess.
What is it?
I've been clear about mine.
Or is it simpler just to attack me and not offer a substantial alternative?

[mackworth]

Demonized, just why are you defending the company?
You own stock?
You dating the bosses daughter?
Or do you think they care about you other than to rake in your cash?
Really why would anyone defend a company that offers half fixed updates? Or half broken depending on how you look at it.
Oh and since the CODING guys you mentioned earlier would know the difference between CACHING and RELAYING you can bet that CACHING was and possibly still is in use.

Mackdaddy, the forum was specific to the DIR-655 and DSLREPORTS is about as reliable as they come.
Maybe you should read more carefully, it could be the source of your misunderstanding.
What you missed.

[Help Me] DIR-655 DNS Relay

I'll ask again: What do either of you consider to be the problem with the router? Not just the nebulous DNS relay, but WHY the DNS relay causes the freeze. Why the router will freeze even with DNS relay off?
Surely you must have some opinion, theory or best guess.
What is it?
I've been clear about mine.
Or is it simpler just to attack me and not offer a substantial alternative?

I am not attacking you, I am just trying to explain to you that this thread started as an issue with freezing that occuring after users updated to 1.31.  Those users (including me) found that disabling DNS relay fixed our issue with freezing.  So why are you fighting this? 

If you router is still freezing wit DNS relay off, then its not this issue and you should start a new thread explaining what your exact issue it and maybe people can help you.  That way when people come here looking for answers, they don't have to read through 14 pages of results just to find out that turning off DNS Relay probably fixes their issue.

And dslreports is reliable as they come?  I lurk there from time to time, and I see people still telling other users to use the 30/30/30 trick when flashing which dlink has already said doesn't do anything.  Does that make dslreports unreliable?  No, it just means that people there don't know anymore about anything than we do.  And only one of your link (as far as I can see) was even specific to the DIR-655 and how do we know that one person that said it had caching even knew what he was talking about?  Maybe he just assumed it had it?

[lizzi555]

I don't understand why you're spending such an effort on the DNS Relay's function.
You won't recognize a difference in speed, no matter whether it is relaying, caching or disabled.

The only real advantage of this function: It is easier to configure devices with static ip addresses.
You only need to enter the IP of your router as DNS server and don't have to care about the DNS addresses of your internet provider and whether they may change sometime in the future.

So it is only a comfort and not a performance feature.

(Not 100% - if you use complex measuring instruments you will find one or the other millisecond, which you saved at searching  )

[GullyFoyle]

Mackdaddy has no explanation, theory or guess as to what the source of the problems might be. But he still chooses to post. Is that useless or what? Why just regurgitate that there is a problem and never attempt to define that problem?
Is there a block function here? Now that I understand his posts are pointless I don't want to see them anymore. Why should I waste my time for tired old repetitious "I know nothing but you are wrong" posts?
Meanwhile new firmware is out.
I wonder if the release times are set properly and the NAT table increased?

[Demonized]

GullyFoyle,
Let's just try and be a civilised guy and respects someone else's opinion without trying to ridicule them. Your assumptions have no solid basis and apparently you're not able to bring up some proof of your assumptions. Ask your "third party source" for more info if you really want to play with the big boys 

[GullyFoyle]

GullyFoyle,
Let's just try and be a civilised guy and respects someone else's opinion without trying to ridicule them. Your assumptions have no solid basis and apparently you're not able to bring up some proof of your assumptions. Ask your "third party source" for more info if you really want to play with the big boys 

So you can't answer the question either? No theory, best guess or attempted scrying.
Maybe you can tell me how to block you and Mackdaddy.
From your other answers, here and other topics, you seem to not have a solution for anything. John Lennon said you are either part of the solution or part of the problem.
I don't want to waste my precious time reading blah/blah/blah posts by part of the problem.
Unlike you I'm here for answers regarding a product I spent hard earned money for.