Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

"ISPs providing DNS and caching was a key part of the Pai FCC's reclassification of ISPs as an "information service"..."

I thought the same thing when I read about that decision. Many try to label DNS as "intrastructure", with the implication that some third party and not the user should have control over it. As an ordinary user, I do not use third party DNS. I will never believe that from a technical standpoint all ordinary users must use third party DNS.




Even worse: unless you are tunneling your DNS traffic past your ISP somehow, even people who think they are using third party DNS likely aren't.


A third party is supplying the answers but not necessarily the third party the user thinks she is using.

Sometimes we can bypass this by using non-standard ports for DNS.


I had an ISP that intercepted my requests, and would return bogus (ads) results if the resolution for that particular address failed. Moving off of port 53 was enough to bypass it, but it was easier to just tunnel my DNS requests. The sad thing now is google thinks I need extra captchas because of my weird DNS geo-location. I can't win.


Is my telephone an "information service" because it has 411?


Or is a phone line an "information service" if the company that provides it delivers a phone book to you periodically?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: