Is DNS Redirection a Network Neutrality Violation?As usual, it depends who you ask.... ( old news - 09:00AM Thursday Nov 15 2007) tags: business · networking · net-neutrality · RoadRunner Cable · Verizon Online DSLWe've been talking a lot lately about DNS redirection services, which eliminate the traditional page not found error and replace it with an ad-laden search portal, so that ISPs can make a buck off of mistyped URLs. Already in use by Cox, Charter and Earthlink, we were the first to report that Verizon, Time Warner Cable, RCN, Embarq and Insight broadband have also just started using the tactic. The practice annoys many users because it breaks core Internet functionality for many applications and tools -- but is interfering with DNS a network neutrality violation? Are ISP search portals that might skew search results in favor of marketing partners? Princeton professor Ed Felten certainly thinks so: Verizons actions have two effects. The obvious effect is to drive traffic from the search engines users chose to Verizons own search engine. That harms users (by overriding their choices) and harms browser vendors (by degrading their users experiences). The less obvious effect is to break some other applications. Felten doesn't mention that most ISPs can defend the neutrality charge by claiming the service is "opt-out." Techdirt doesn't think it's a neutrality violation, as users have the right to use alternative DNS servers: it's worth keeping in mind that you're not required to use your ISP's DNS server at all. ISPs provide DNS servers as a courtesy, the same way they might provide you with a free email account. But you don't have to use it. You're free to point your computer to another DNS server, such as OpenDNS, just as you can use a third-party email service such as GMail. And if you do that, the settings of Verizon's DNS server won't affect you at all. We've talked to countless ISP engineers who say they hate the idea, but it was hoisted upon them by higher level management. Marketing departments, ever eager to please investors with a new revenue stream, believe that the folks who complain about this practice are simply a niche contingent of fringe users not worth paying attention to. It does seem to us that if we're willing to write off every connection degradation as a minor annoyance of no import in the neutrality debate (port blocking, traffic shaping, DNS redirection), we'll be sure to have largely crippled and ad-slathered connectivity in no time. Still, whether it's a network neutrality violation or not, such "services" are little more than money grabs, and should be opt-in. Related:- Verizon DNS Redirection 'Service' Spreads
- Time Warner Cable To Start Per-Gigabyte Fee Trial On Thursday
- What ISP Transparency?
- Canadian Regulators Strangling Independent ISPs
- UDP BitTorrent Will Destroy The Interwebs!
- Virgin Takes Aim At BitTorrent
- Time Warner Still Pretending Core, Last Mile Fiber The Same
- Verizon's Open Development Initiative? So Far It's A Joke
|
 kingofdsl
join:2002-12-11 Afton, OK | Corporations own the Internets, not the people. Corporations own the Internets, not the people.
If you don't like the degraded "services" you are paying for, you are free to find a country with better "Internets" service. | |
|  |  jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04 USA | Re: Corporations own the Internets, not the people. You should be used to hearing about the "Internets"! LOL | |
|  |  |   Packeteers Premium join:2005-06-18 Forest Hills, NY | Re: No problem agreed. as long as they don't bog out down with videos, infect you with trojens, or annoy you with popups, then I say redirection is just part of free enterprise. | |
|  |  |  ashworth
join:2001-10-06 Pittsburgh, PA | Re: No problem Exactly. If you mis-type the URL and sends you somewhere other than your intended target, then where ever you go, you need to enter the correct URL anyway ??? Go figure. | |
|   swhitney2003 I can't drive 55. Premium join:2003-06-13 NH clubs:  | OpenDNS Is it possible to opt out of OpenDNS's redirection? | |
|  |   Jodokast96 R.I.P Bassman442 Premium join:2005-11-23 Erial, NJ | Re: OpenDNS I do believe you can opt out of their redirection by registering with them. | |
|  |  mikenolan7 Premium join:2005-06-07 Torrance, CA
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
| The difference between OpenDNS and the ISP's doing this is that you must opt IN to OpenDNS. There is no need to opt out, if you don't specifically set up your systems to use OpenDNS, your DNS searches will never go to OpenDNS in the first place, they will go to your ISP's DNS servers. That is where you must opt OUT. Unlike the ISP's, where you must pay to subscribe, OpenDNS is free, and the redirection is their only revenue stream. Maybe it was a bad idea on David Ulevitch's part, because it started yet another circus on the internet, but I appreciate what OpenDNS provides, and I hope this doesn't end up hurting David. From what I have seen he works very hard to provide a good service. If everyone making money on the internet did the same, we wouldn't have anything to talk about here. | |
|  |  |   swhitney2003 I can't drive 55. Premium join:2003-06-13 NH clubs:  | Re: OpenDNS I started using OpenDNS over a year ago because I noticed it resolved address quicker than my ISP. At some point in time they implemented redirection. So in this case, I say I want to 'opt out.' | |
|  |  |  |  mikenolan7 Premium join:2005-06-07 Torrance, CA
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: OpenDNS Just change your DNS searches back to your ISP. Need more detail of what you are using to help beyond that. Send me an email through dslr if you need help setting it back, I am sure that David wouldn't want people stuck on his service that didn't want to be there. I won't try to sell you anything, I don't have anything to sell. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  mikenolan7 Premium join:2005-06-07 Torrance, CA | Re: OpenDNS Looks like you certainly don't need any help. Good luck. I almost never see the redirection, because the most useful class I took in high school was typing. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |   swhitney2003 I can't drive 55. Premium join:2003-06-13 NH clubs:  | Re: OpenDNS Touché. I had typing classes back in middle school. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   bigunk Gort, Klattu Birada Nikto
join:2001-02-10 Santa Clarita, CA
·AT&T Yahoo
| Re: OpenDNS What is middle school? No such thing when I was kid. Would it be the same as junior-high? Also, when I was younger, elementary was up to 6th, and junior-high went to 9th. High school was only 3 years. Funny thing, when I got into high school, it was 4 years, but I joined as a sophomore.
I wonder what politically-correct mind dreamed up the big change of grade level and name. -- There is not a man in the country that can't make a living for himself and family. But he can't make a living for them AND his government, the way his government is living. What the government has got to do is live as cheap as the people. - Will Rogers | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   bigunk Gort, Klattu Birada Nikto
join:2001-02-10 Santa Clarita, CA | Re: OpenDNS Wow. Maybe that's only in NH? | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04 USA | Re: OpenDNS No, it's a midwest - east coast thing... | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   EverAndAnon
@verizon.net | I've never even heard of an elementary school that didn't go through the sixth grade... well, until now. Really? | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  fiberguy My views are my own. Premium join:2005-05-20
| Re: OpenDNS I've never heard of a school ending in grade 5 either.
The only two ways I've ever heard of it being broken up was:
Method 1 - Grade School: 1-6 Jr High / Middle : 7-8 High School: 9-12
Method 2 - Grade School: 1-6 Jr High / Middle : 7-9 High School: 10-12
And, where I was raised, in Sacramento CA, it's done both ways depending on the school district. -- "Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and Im told its a womans prerogative..." | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   nwrickert sand groper Premium,MVM join:2004-09-04 Geneva, IL
·AT&T Midwest
| What is middle school? ...
I wonder what politically-correct mind dreamed up the big change of grade level and name. I don't think this has anything much to do with political correctness. It has more to do with economics. When a community finds that many of its neighborhood schools are overcrowded, it might decide to build one school for the middle grades instead of expanding all of the neighborhood schools. And then "middle school" becomes a natural name for this new school house. This has happened in enough communities that the name "middle school" has become a commonplace, and is now also used for just that range of grades even when there is no separate school building. -- AT&T dsl; Westell 2200 modem/router; SuSE 10.1; firefox 2.0.0.8 | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26 North Andover, MA
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: OpenDNS My grade was the first to enter the middle school (where I grew up) instead of the junior high. At the time they moved the 6th grade out of its own school to join the 7th and 8th, and moved the 5th into it's own school. So it went
Separate grade schools: K-4 Central 5th grade Middle School: 6-8 High School: 9-12 | |
|  |  |  |  |  |   TK Junk Mail Go ahead, make my day Premium join:2002-03-03 Margate City, NJ clubs:
·Comcast
edit: November 15th, @10:39AM
| said by swhitney2003 :I have Comcast, and I know it is as simple as removing the Static DNS entries from my router. I was just curious if there was a way to opt-out of their redirection. I have registered and it appears it is possible if you disable 'typo correction'. I'll have to wait until I get home to see if it stops redirection. When it comes down to it, redirection doesn't bother me all that much... I hardly ever go to incorrect sites, since everything is bookmarked... Probably the only thing bothers me about it is I like the simplicity of the browser's error page over the bright orangey page of openDNS with search results. Not a huge deal for me. Choosing that option works as long as you haven't chosen other options like "shortcuts". So, yes you can opt out of Opendns redirection. I did it and it works. -- Internet News My BLOG My Web Page
| |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  markosjal
join:2005-08-06 Mexico
| Re: OpenDNS In Oregon, Middle School was 6th through 8th Grades, as I recall. I had only "heard" of Jr High School which started at the 8th Grade. In Middle school we were offered Woodshop, Foreign Languages, Home Ec, typing, etc. Oh and the boys were REQUIRED to take Home Ec and the Girls REQUIRED to take WoodShop | |
|  |   nwrickert sand groper Premium,MVM join:2004-09-04 Geneva, IL
·AT&T Midwest
| Is it possible to opt out of OpenDNS's redirection? That's easy. Just stop using OpenDNS. And this also opts out of their tracking your internet activity. -- AT&T dsl; Westell 2200 modem/router; SuSE 10.1; firefox 2.0.0.8 | |
|  |  NormanS Premium,MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by swhitney2003 :Is it possible to opt out of OpenDNS's redirection? I just did that. Not that I am planning to use OpenDNS, but I did want to see how it worked. You have to register with them. Registration is free. I don't recall if the option for contact by marketers was "opt in" (you fill in a blank check box), or "opt out" (you clear a pre-checked box); but, so far, I have received no email to the registration email address I used, other than the account setup verification email.
Once I had registered the account, it was just a matter of using the "Dashboard", and clearing two check boxes on the redirection page.
You can just plug their DNS server IP addresses in to your router, or NIC, and they will work, but redirection is on by default, and can only be changes through the "Dashboard" of a registered account. -- Norman ~Oh Lord, why have you come ~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|  footballdude
join:2002-08-13 Imperial, MO | violation? How can there be network neutrality 'violations' if we don't have network neutrality laws? If there are laws out there that I missed, why are people lobbying Congress for new ones? | |
|   GlobalMind Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy Premium join:2001-10-29 Hollywood, FL
| Violation? Ok now, I have to say first that I consider myself essentially pro whatever means we all aren't getting hosed by ISPs who just want to extort money via "tiers" of access.
However, I have to say....this is presented as if Network Neutrality is a regulation. It isn't as far as I am aware.
How can there be a "violation" of anything if there isn't a statute or policy to violate? -- TheGlobalMind.com | Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | Angus the IT Chap | |
|  |  Skippy25
join:2000-09-13 Hazelwood, MO
edit: November 15th, @10:46AM
| Re: Violation? Net neutrality is self regulated by us. If we don't speak up when someone impedes on our traffic, regardless of the reason, then we are no longer regulating it.
In my personal opinion doing this specific thing does not violate anything. As pointed out before, DNS is a service provided by your ISP just like email or web hosting. They do it so EVERY request doesn't have to transverse their network everytime resolving names. You can use another DNS server out there if you don't like it. And if you are the type that is running services that depends on DNS, then you should be smart enough to use another DNS server that does not redirect. It's that plain and simple. | |
|  |   swhx7 Premium join:2006-07-23 Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
| It's a principle that many peopl think the law should respect, even if it currently doesn't.
If we didn't have freedom of speech and of religion specified in the US Constitution, for example, would you be unable to imagine what these would mean? The authors had the ideals in mind even before they were embodied in law.
Netowork neutrality means that the ISP does not selectively interfere with or treat packets differently based on the content or destination of the traffic.
Limiting bandwidth - overall or per customer - or amounts of traffic allowed, is not contrary to the neutrality principle, as long as there is no discrimination. | |
|  |  NormanS Premium,MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by GlobalMind :Ok now, I have to say first that I consider myself essentially pro whatever means we all aren't getting hosed by ISPs who just want to extort money via "tiers" of access. However, I have to say....this is presented as if Network Neutrality is a regulation. It isn't as far as I am aware. How can there be a "violation" of anything if there isn't a statute or policy to violate? Is it possible to "violate" the status quo ante? -- Norman ~Oh Lord, why have you come ~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|  |  |   GlobalMind Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy Premium join:2001-10-29 Hollywood, FL
| Re: Violation? said by NormanS :Is it possible to "violate" the status quo ante? Good question. If that's the way it was, then what's changed? lol
To address a few other comments, I suppose I need to further clarify that I support the premise of net neutrality, the problem I have here is throwing out the idea that there is a neutrality violation at work here, like we have some kind of policy/law in place which dictates neutrality exist.
When and if those laws come to pass then fine, a violation may exist. Up to that point, the actions we speak of are just bad form on the part of the carrier and let them be berated in the media for it.
Otherwise, violation is a rather strong term, and I think it is misplaced in this context. -- TheGlobalMind.com | Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | Angus the IT Chap | |
|  |  |  |  NormanS Premium,MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: Violation? said by GlobalMind :said by NormanS :Is it possible to "violate" the status quo ante? Good question.  If that's the way it was, then what's changed? lol If "net neutrality" was the status quo ante, then what has changed is a different way of treating data. If that can be called a, "violation".
However, I agree that too many times the word "violation" is used in a context which implies that there is some kind of law in place; which, clearly, there is not. -- Norman ~Oh Lord, why have you come ~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|   tschmidt Premium,MVM join:2000-11-12 Milford, NH
·Verizon Online DSL
| Probably not As much as I'm not a fan of redirection, since it does break some application, I don' think it is all that big a deal.
For those comfortable with it it provides options for mistyped URLs.
For folks like me who hate it is is easy to use an alternate DNS provider or run your own DNS resolver.
My opinion is Network Neutrality regulations should be limited to those areas where ISP has degree of control that customer has no other option. That is not the case with DNS.
/tom | |
|   gaforces United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07 Santa Cruz, CA
·Cruzio Internet
| DNS Neutral I think that DNS should remain neutral. The article fails to show any examples or proof of the prof's statements. How exacly is it hurting browser vendors? By taking something it shouldnt have to begin with? That is walking the network neutrality tightrope there. Most people use the default settings ... Not having chosen any search service. | |
|   Jodokast96 R.I.P Bassman442 Premium join:2005-11-23 Erial, NJ
·Verizon Online DSL
| One little problem with the story The practice annoys many users because it breaks core Internet functionality for many applications and tools... Has that actually been shown to be the case? It's been mentioned as a possibility several times, but no one here has yet to show a situation where that's actually happened. While I don't like the idea of the redirects, unless it causes actual real world problems, it's not the big deal people make it out to be since you can opt-out, though opt-in would be better. One area they may want to be wary of is that when you intentionally go to a search site like Google or Yahoo, most people know what comes back in the results may not be safe. But inexperienced users may think that since Verizon is giving them these results, they are automatically safe, which may not be the case. | |
|  |  See 7 replies to this post | |
 karlmarx
join:2006-09-18 Nashua, NH
·Fairpoint Communic..
| Short Answer: Yes, it's a violation The 'tenets' of net neutrality are quite simple. The ISP is REQUIRED to follow the RFC rules of the internet. The fact that they are abusing the DNS server, and NOT giving a legitimate reply would be considered abuse of net neutrality. What's to stop them from changing a LEGAL domain, oh, I don't know, say, www.thepiratebay.org to redirect them to www.riaa.com.
DNS servers are DESIGNED to work in a certain way. If you mistype the name, it's REQUIRED to give you an error code that your computer can understand. By redirecting 'bad' queries to their own service, they are violating the tenets of neutrality. The ISP is a DUMB PIPE, NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS. Anything that CHANGES that (aka filtering ala sandvine), is a VIOLATION of how the internet should work.
You should ALWAYS be wary of any company that corrupts how a network is supposed to work for 'the consumers benefit'. Remember, it's NOT to your benefit to have the system work incorrectly. It IS in your benefit to have whatever application, protocol, or feature you are trying to run WORK AS ADVERTISED.
If we WANTED to live in a 'walled garden', then go sign up for AOL. For the REST of US, we want the internet to WORK the way it's supposed to. -- Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 100mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. | |
|  |  See 18 replies to this post | |
 amungus Premium join:2004-11-26 America clubs:
·Cox HSI
| phone analogy So, to use a phone analogy...
It'd be like calling a non-existent # but instead of hearing the normal tones/announcement that the # isn't there, you get a used car salesman blasting ads in your eardrum, or some ad for tacos, or who knows what - when all you wanted/needed to know was that you might have mis-dialed the freaking number.
I don't want that on my screen either. I'd rather have an "oops, you suck" error message than any form of advertisement.
Additional revenue stream... more like additional customers screaming at their computer screens...
If I'm looking for something, but don't know an exact address to go to, guess what I use? A SEARCH ENGINE!
Have these people forgotten what search engines are for? | |
|   EverAndAnon
@verizon.net | Nah... It's just an equal opportunity offender. | |
|   mark470 eh? Premium join:2002-01-09 Hooksett, NH | just not right so whats next fake zone files that point google to big-isp.net -- darn wears that boot loader | |
|  |  |  estover
join:2004-03-16 Valencia, PA clubs: | Re: Crazy For one they paid for them. | |
|   jjoshua Premium join:2001-06-01 Scotch Plains, NJ | Simple ISPs who use DNS Redirection cannot call their system DNS. If it doesn't follow the RFC then it's not DNS. | |
|  |  |  |  |   factchecker
@cox.net
| Re: Simple said by gatorkram :RFC stands for "Request for comment" it surely isn't internet law. And RFCs are the documents upon with the internet and its protocols are based. They maybe called "Request for Comment" documents, but they are far more important than simple technical discussion pieces. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   avd706 Premium join:2003-02-06 Great Neck, NY
| Re: Simple Show me the isp that is not in conformance either one of these RFCs. | |
|   Hehe
@ssa.gov
| DNS is an Internet standard The ISP is in violation if they don't adhear to the standard (IMO).
Network solutions tried something like that a few years ago. They got their hands slapped.
I have my own DNS server, I don't depend on the Comcast DNS servers, so I can't get false/fake/forged DNS data from Comcast. | |
|   Nightshade sic semper tyrannis Premium join:2002-05-26 Salem, OR
edit: November 15th, @02:18PM
| It Is Not a Violation Here's why.
A lot of what network neutrality is equal access to content on the internet. The thing is if the content is not there, or not on that particular website (re: 404 error), then how does the concept of network neutrality apply? In order for network neutrality to work you got to have the content there in the first place. It is your responsibility to find the content if it exists at all on the internet. Not to mention you don't have to use the search portal that the DNS redirects you to.
It is as simple as typing www.google.com in your address bar. | |
|  |   tschmidt Premium,MVM join:2000-11-12 Milford, NH
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: It Is Not a Violation said by Nightshade : The thing is if the content is not there, or not on that particular website (re: 404 error), then how does the concept of network neutrality apply? I agree in general with one caveat. The ISP cannot interfere with customers selecting alternate DNS services or running their own resolvers.
DNS is not an integral service that must be provided by the ISP.
/tom | |
|  |  |  jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04 USA edit: November 16th, @02:21AM
| Re: It Is Not a Violation Oh, but if customers run their own resolvers they're violating the TOS. They're running servers! The ISPs would NEVER go for THAT! Next thing you know the customers will put up web servers and email servers! It's a slippery slope from there! | |
|  |  |  |   tschmidt Premium,MVM join:2000-11-12 Milford, NH
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: It Is Not a Violation said by jjeffeory :Oh, but if customers run their own resolvers they're violating the TOS. They're running servers! I don't understand your comment.
A DNS resolver is not a public server it is a client app accessible at most by other PCs on customer's LAN not the Internet.
/tom | |
|   swhx7 Premium join:2006-07-23 Elbonia | Here's why it is a violation Ed Felten in his "Freedom to Tinker" column explains why DNS hijacking is a network neutrality violation: »www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1227 | |
|  |   tschmidt Premium,MVM join:2000-11-12 Milford, NH
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Here's why it is a violation I'm a fan of his but I disagree on this issue.
In my opinion Net Neutrality regulation should be limited this those things that can only be delivered by the ISP.
In this example it is trivial to use an alternative DNS service or run your own. On the other hand if ISP interferes with a customer's ability to use alternate DNS then I would agree it is a violation.
Traffic shaping, usage throttling, etc are fine as long a it is the customer who is in charge of making the selection. If I want to pay a premium so my: gaming, VoIP, etc packets are handled at a higher priority that is fine as long as the customer gets to determined which ones get privileged service.
What is unacceptable is if the ISP strikes a business deal with company XYZ to carry their packets with high priority at the expense of other none partners. The ISP should not be in a position to be a gatekeeper of how customers use the Internet.
We need to strike a balance protecting the public commons while giving companies enough incentive to deliver service. Net Neutrality is basically the notion of "common carriage," a hundred year old telephone term dressed up for the 21th century.
/tom | |
|  |  |  estover
join:2004-03-16 Valencia, PA clubs:
edit: November 18th, @07:36AM
| Re: Here's why it is a violation The thinking that it is not a violation because the ISP does not have to provide DNS service is akin to saying that auto dealers don't have to provide keys to the car you just bought. Now I could pop over to my neighbors house and have him make me a set (hes a locksmith), but most people assume that when you buy a car you get the keys. Just like when Joe Blow orders Internet service he expects to be able to type www.google.com and get there. Outside the people that understand the working of IP and the Internet need the ISP to provide the basic workings so that they can browse the web and exchange e-mail.
I guess that everyone that feels that the ISP hijacking failed DNS requests is OK, would also be OK with them adding an advertisement to the end of all e-mails sent through there servers. After all they do not have to provide you with an e-mail address. I imagine then you would also be OK with an ad popping up between page clicks....
(click) While you wait for the page to be displayed, have a look at our sponsor for this half hour..... Click here to continue to your page.
After all they are just supplying you with an IP address nothing more.
I say vote with your wallet. Armstrong Cable in Butler area of PA has started a test on one of their DNS servers. I called them up and bitched. I am going to now order up a T1 and move to sat service for TV. I am also not getting their digital phone service for my business, and moving my security service from Guardian (owned by Armstrong). It will cost me about 500 more a month, but this move is going to cost Armstrong 600 plus a month just on my account. And then there is the 35 accounts I have with them for my clients. They will all move to DSL service when the contract is up. That will be another 3000 to 4000 a month. I wonder how long it will take them to make that up with there page clicks?
And each new contract will be written with a clause in it that they will leave the core functions alone. POP, SMTP, DNS.
Rant over | |
|
|
|