4 ms·

Am I correct in thinking they use a single site hosted by them to decide if the router is connected to the internet? Did noone not think this might not be the b

Am I correct in thinking they use a single site hosted by them to decide if the router is connected to the internet? Did noone not think this might not be the best idea?

drewcrawford 12y ago
What would you suggest? Placing the question of whether or not their products continue to work in the hands of third parties? I think there is a conversation to be had here about the proper way to tie add-on services (which are inevitable) with one-time-purchase products. Consumers want some indication of whether they can reach the Internet, but this really requires some ongoing cost on the router manufacturer's part, which cannot be recouped indefinitely from a one-time hardware sale. we face a similar crisis in mobile apps. Apps increasingly require backend services to provide core functionality, which just isn't sustainable indefinitely with a fixed-price model. Inevitably when these companies are acquired, the backend shuts down, and people lose the product that they "paid" for. I think in the long-term, we are going to have to move to a subscription-based model where people are paying regularly for things they used to buy one-off. But in the short-term, you can have an endless stream of VC-backed companies who can afford to take on that cost for short periods. So anyone who actually broke rank would get beaten back pretty hard by the market.
- mokash 12y ago
  Mate, what are you even banging on about?
  - colinramsay 12y ago
    He's saying that the back-end powering services which users love get switched off too often. Like in multiplayer video games where the central servers get discontinued, rendering the game useless. In the same way that if I wrote a script relying on some aspect of your personal website, that script would now fail because your site currently returns a 403 message :)
- blueskin_ 12y ago
  >I think in the long-term, we are going to have to move to a subscription-based model where people are paying regularly for things they used to buy one-off. i.e. renting software. People don't want to rent software. Look at the (un)popularity of Adobe CC etc. to show that. This is why online activation/backend is just a bad idea in general.
  - PhantomGremlin 12y ago
    > People don't want to rent software. Look at the (un)popularity of Adobe CC etc. to show that. Something I stole from the Internet a while ago: "What is it with these customer-oriented companies that forget where their money is coming from?" Look up the words "Monopoly" and "Oligopoly" Short answer is, they don't *have* to care. You want them more than they need you. To further the point, Adobe stock hit an "all time high" earlier this year, on better than expected revenue and earnings.[1] YOU might not like Adobe CC, but they're making plenty of money renting it to you. [1] http://247wallst.com/technology-3/2014/06/17/adobe-earnings-brings-all-time-high/ http://247wallst.com/technology-3/2014/06/17/adobe-earnings-...
- unwind 12y ago
  You seem to be identifying what they did in your first line, then go off on some kind of wild tangent in the rest of the post. As I read it, there is no case of any "service" or "subscription" happening here. It's just a design that relies on a single point of failure to determine whether or not a product can perform its designed functionality, which might be a bit ... sloppy from an engineering perspective. In general, answering "am I connected to the Internet?" without relying on things outside your control is hard, probably because the Internet is all about things outside your direct control. :)
- amouat 12y ago
  My (rather old) router pings yahoo.com as a default test. Yahoo definitely didn't make it. However, the URL can be changed and the router doesn't stop working if yahoo can't be reached.
- lordbusiness 12y ago
  I would suggest placing the question of whether or not my internet connection works in the hands of my ISP. I had a similar situation when I used a Linksys router; if Linksys had any problems at all with their cloud overhead infrastructure, my internet connection died. All I need for my internet connection to work is my ISP's infrastructure; I want my router to work without phoning home to some bloatware belonging to its manufacturer. Apologies; please don't down vote me for this opinion.
UnoriginalGuy 12y ago
That isn't really the key question, the key question is: Why when that check failed were the routers "unable to connect to the internet" inspite of actually being connected to the internet. I'm guessing the software on the routers is designed to constantly release/renew the WAN side when connectivity isn't established. The problem with that design is that ANY disruption will cause a complete internet loss (e.g. DNS timeout, site goes down, route to host, etc). Microsoft has a similar kind of "am I online check" however the difference is when the check fails all Windows does is display a different icon and suggest (via a graphic) that you're not on the internet. So that to me is the real Belkin blunder, not the check, or even that it used Belkins' site. The blunder is that they had the router continuously renew the WAN side until that single check worked.
bitJericho 12y ago
I'm not really sure why they needed to perform this check at all? DNS will work properly whether you have a connection to the internet or not (it will just say it failed to lookup the address you requested)
personZ 12y ago
The iOS 6 update broke wifi for many people for the same reason -- it would hit a certain Apple page to determine if there was through connectivity, and if that test failed it would decide that the wifi connection needed authentication. Apple fixed it by putting up the page it was expecting. http://www.iphonehacks.com/2012/09/fix-wi-fi-connectivity-issue-after-upgrading-to-ios-6.html http://www.iphonehacks.com/2012/09/fix-wi-fi-connectivity-is... It seems to be a recurring tactic.
- zyxley 12y ago
  As of late Apple seems to do better at this by using a variety of different domain names (apparently pulled from their secondary 'we don't want somebody else using our product names' set, since they include ones like 'ibooks.info'), which the phone seems to rotate through so it's not relying on a single DNS result or server.
forgottenpass 12y ago
Did noone not think this might not be the best idea? Unnecessary network dependencies are all the rage in software these days.

Am I correct in thinking they use a single site hosted by them to decide if the router is connected to the internet? Did noone not think this might not be the best idea?

drewcrawford 12y ago

What would you suggest? Placing the question of whether or not their products continue to work in the hands of third parties? I think there is a conversation to be had here about the proper way to tie add-on services (which are inevitable) with one-time-purchase products. Consumers want some indication of whether they can reach the Internet, but this really requires some ongoing cost on the router manufacturer's part, which cannot be recouped indefinitely from a one-time hardware sale. we face a similar crisis in mobile apps. Apps increasingly require backend services to provide core functionality, which just isn't sustainable indefinitely with a fixed-price model. Inevitably when these companies are acquired, the backend shuts down, and people lose the product that they "paid" for. I think in the long-term, we are going to have to move to a subscription-based model where people are paying regularly for things they used to buy one-off. But in the short-term, you can have an endless stream of VC-backed companies who can afford to take on that cost for short periods. So anyone who actually broke rank would get beaten back pretty hard by the market.

mokash 12y ago
Mate, what are you even banging on about?
- colinramsay 12y ago
  He's saying that the back-end powering services which users love get switched off too often. Like in multiplayer video games where the central servers get discontinued, rendering the game useless. In the same way that if I wrote a script relying on some aspect of your personal website, that script would now fail because your site currently returns a 403 message :)
blueskin_ 12y ago
>I think in the long-term, we are going to have to move to a subscription-based model where people are paying regularly for things they used to buy one-off. i.e. renting software. People don't want to rent software. Look at the (un)popularity of Adobe CC etc. to show that. This is why online activation/backend is just a bad idea in general.
- PhantomGremlin 12y ago
  > People don't want to rent software. Look at the (un)popularity of Adobe CC etc. to show that. Something I stole from the Internet a while ago: "What is it with these customer-oriented companies that forget where their money is coming from?" Look up the words "Monopoly" and "Oligopoly" Short answer is, they don't *have* to care. You want them more than they need you. To further the point, Adobe stock hit an "all time high" earlier this year, on better than expected revenue and earnings.[1] YOU might not like Adobe CC, but they're making plenty of money renting it to you. [1] http://247wallst.com/technology-3/2014/06/17/adobe-earnings-brings-all-time-high/ http://247wallst.com/technology-3/2014/06/17/adobe-earnings-...
unwind 12y ago
You seem to be identifying what they did in your first line, then go off on some kind of wild tangent in the rest of the post. As I read it, there is no case of any "service" or "subscription" happening here. It's just a design that relies on a single point of failure to determine whether or not a product can perform its designed functionality, which might be a bit ... sloppy from an engineering perspective. In general, answering "am I connected to the Internet?" without relying on things outside your control is hard, probably because the Internet is all about things outside your direct control. :)
amouat 12y ago
My (rather old) router pings yahoo.com as a default test. Yahoo definitely didn't make it. However, the URL can be changed and the router doesn't stop working if yahoo can't be reached.
lordbusiness 12y ago
I would suggest placing the question of whether or not my internet connection works in the hands of my ISP. I had a similar situation when I used a Linksys router; if Linksys had any problems at all with their cloud overhead infrastructure, my internet connection died. All I need for my internet connection to work is my ISP's infrastructure; I want my router to work without phoning home to some bloatware belonging to its manufacturer. Apologies; please don't down vote me for this opinion.

UnoriginalGuy 12y ago

That isn't really the key question, the key question is: Why when that check failed were the routers "unable to connect to the internet" inspite of actually being connected to the internet. I'm guessing the software on the routers is designed to constantly release/renew the WAN side when connectivity isn't established. The problem with that design is that ANY disruption will cause a complete internet loss (e.g. DNS timeout, site goes down, route to host, etc). Microsoft has a similar kind of "am I online check" however the difference is when the check fails all Windows does is display a different icon and suggest (via a graphic) that you're not on the internet. So that to me is the real Belkin blunder, not the check, or even that it used Belkins' site. The blunder is that they had the router continuously renew the WAN side until that single check worked.

bitJericho 12y ago

I'm not really sure why they needed to perform this check at all? DNS will work properly whether you have a connection to the internet or not (it will just say it failed to lookup the address you requested)

personZ 12y ago

The iOS 6 update broke wifi for many people for the same reason -- it would hit a certain Apple page to determine if there was through connectivity, and if that test failed it would decide that the wifi connection needed authentication. Apple fixed it by putting up the page it was expecting. http://www.iphonehacks.com/2012/09/fix-wi-fi-connectivity-issue-after-upgrading-to-ios-6.html http://www.iphonehacks.com/2012/09/fix-wi-fi-connectivity-is... It seems to be a recurring tactic.

zyxley 12y ago
As of late Apple seems to do better at this by using a variety of different domain names (apparently pulled from their secondary 'we don't want somebody else using our product names' set, since they include ones like 'ibooks.info'), which the phone seems to rotate through so it's not relying on a single DNS result or server.

forgottenpass 12y ago

Did noone not think this might not be the best idea? Unnecessary network dependencies are all the rage in software these days.