Problems with DG834G & DNS proxying?

Anyone seen this problem? I have a DG384G and I have DHCP from router to
WAN/ISP. My LAN clients are also configured for DHCP with no DNS servers
configured.

What is _supposed_ to happen is that the DG384G acts as a DNS proxy in this
case but this doesn't seem to happen. I see period DNS failures where I
can't access anything using hostnames.

I've currently configured the LAN clients to access the WAN/ISP DNS servers
directly and this seems to work - but I shouldn't have to do that!

Anyone else seen this?
Paul DS.

"Paul D Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:4219adf1$1@212.67.96.135...
> Anyone seen this problem? I have a DG384G and I have DHCP from router to
> WAN/ISP. My LAN clients are also configured for DHCP with no DNS servers
> configured.
>
> What is _supposed_ to happen is that the DG384G acts as a DNS proxy in
this
> case but this doesn't seem to happen. I see period DNS failures where I
> can't access anything using hostnames.
>
> I've currently configured the LAN clients to access the WAN/ISP DNS
servers
> directly and this seems to work - but I shouldn't have to do that!

For clarity, do you mean 'periodic' failures i.e. sometimes it works,
sometimes it fails?

If so, the problem could be a slow DNS server further down the line.

In this case, the router will try to resolve the DNS query on your behalf
before responding and this will probably increase the delay.
Depending on the behaviour when a query times out this could add enough
delay to convince your local PC that DNS isn't working.

Bypassing one link in the chain can make just enough difference when timings
are marginal.
The router may also not efficiently handle queries timing out.

I have seen occasional slow DNS via Nildram recently which can make things
grind to a halt for no apparent reason as applications sit waiting for a DNS
name to resolve to an IP address.

If DNS never resolves, then check your router configuration to make sure
that DNS proxy is enabled - I know it is an option in my SAR 705.

HTH
Dave R

In message <4219adf1$1@212.67.96.135>, Paul D Smith
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>Anyone seen this problem? I have a DG384G and I have DHCP from router to
>WAN/ISP. My LAN clients are also configured for DHCP with no DNS servers
>configured.
>
>What is _supposed_ to happen is that the DG384G acts as a DNS proxy in this
>case but this doesn't seem to happen. I see period DNS failures where I
>can't access anything using hostnames.
>
>I've currently configured the LAN clients to access the WAN/ISP DNS servers
>directly and this seems to work - but I shouldn't have to do that!
>
>Anyone else seen this?
>Paul DS.
>
>
Paul,

What version of the firmware are you using?

I have not experienced any similar problems, but I remember some posts
on the Netgear forum about loss of DNS resolution. I think that this was
reported as fixed with the newer (albeit beta) firmware.
2.10.09(beta) is on the Netgear support site.

I would take a browse through the Netgear support forum.

Regards
--
Peter R Cook

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 19:43:57 +0000, Peter R Cook
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I have not experienced any similar problems, but I remember some posts
>on the Netgear forum about loss of DNS resolution. I think that this was
>reported as fixed with the newer (albeit beta) firmware.
>2.10.09(beta) is on the Netgear support site.

2.10.10 is available at http://www.longview.eclipse.co.uk/netgear/

I've been running it for 11 minutes now and it seems stable so far :-)

--
Philip

[Don't top post. Quote selectively. Don't use HTML. Enjoy Usenet]

Philip K wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 19:43:57 +0000, Peter R Cook
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> I have not experienced any similar problems, but I remember some
>> posts on the Netgear forum about loss of DNS resolution. I think
>> that this was reported as fixed with the newer (albeit beta)
>> firmware.
>> 2.10.09(beta) is on the Netgear support site.
>
> 2.10.10 is available at http://www.longview.eclipse.co.uk/netgear/
>
> I've been running it for 11 minutes now and it seems stable so far :-)

Wait until it's hours before you say that it's stable, it was rebooting
after about 24 hours with that update for me so I reverted back to the
previous beta version 1.10.8 & it's been well over 100 hours now & that's
when you can call it stable....

kraftee <kraftee@spamoff& die.com> wrote:
: >
: > 2.10.10 is available at http://www.longview.eclipse.co.uk/netgear/
: >
: > I've been running it for 11 minutes now and it seems stable so far :-)

: Wait until it's hours before you say that it's stable, it was rebooting
: after about 24 hours with that update for me so I reverted back to the
: previous beta version 1.10.8 & it's been well over 100 hours now & that's
: when you can call it stable....

Well, as 2.10.10 has gone over 310 hours for me with no resets, I *WOULD* call
it stable!

Brian McIlwrath wrote:
> kraftee <kraftee@spamoff& die.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> 2.10.10 is available at http://www.longview.eclipse.co.uk/netgear/
>>>
>>> I've been running it for 11 minutes now and it seems stable so far
>>> :-)
>
>> Wait until it's hours before you say that it's stable, it was
>> rebooting after about 24 hours with that update for me so I reverted
>> back to the previous beta version 1.10.8 & it's been well over 100
>> hours now & that's when you can call it stable....
>
> Well, as 2.10.10 has gone over 310 hours for me with no resets, I
> *WOULD* call it stable!

What works for some doesn't for others, go figure, but I still stand by the
fact you can't call anything stable if it's only been in use for 11 minutes
you have to wait a lot longer than that (even 48 hours wasn't long enough
when I was having my original Netgear problems)