A commenter to the blog reports that Rogers has caved on the DNS re-direct issue following intense criticism from many companies who found that the approach hampered the ability for employees to work from home. The company has reportedly established an alternate DNS server at altdns.rnc.net.cable.rogers.com (64.71.255.202). If this is accurate (I am unable to check at the moment), this would represent the second time this month that Rogers has responded to intense public criticism, providing some evidence that speaking out can work.
Rogers Caves on DNS Re-Directs?
8 Comments
Recent Posts
Canada’s DST Debacle a Case Study of Digital Strategy Trouble 
Canadian Government Caves on Digital Services Tax After Years of Dismissing the Risks of Trade Retaliation 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 238: David Fraser on Why Bill C-2’s Lawful Access Powers May Put Canadians’ Digital Security At Risk 
Ignoring the Warning Signs: Why Did the Canadian Government Dismiss the Trade Risks of a Digital Services Tax? 
Why Bill C-2 Faces a Likely Constitutional Challenge By Placing Solicitor-Client Privilege at Risk
Now if only we could do the same with Be
… And get them to back down from the additional text message charges they want to add.
This isn’t a soluton
So you’d still have to enter the DNS information manually on each PC/Router…this is hardly different than using the OpenDNS servers that I switched to…but without the evil.
its somewhat of a solution
altdns.rnc.net.cable.rogers.com
64.71.255.202
The user who shared this was correct this works!! no more rogers bs for now…
Too little. Too late.
And gee…..if they’d just done this last week when I asked them to, instead of telling me I could take my business elsewhere, I would still be their customer 🙂
Still no mention of it on the redirection site, but at least they offer a net-neutral service now. Cudos to Rogers for listening to customer concerns.
An opt-in service would be ideal… but I’m definitely glad they are offering an alternate. Shame I already switched to OpenDNS.
Rogers backed down on their “injecting content into other people’s web pages” thing last year too. Perhaps a cable tv company just isn’t cut out for internet service providing.
Technical Issue
> 64.71.255.202
And, if my router does not support “255” as a valid address element, am I supposed to upgrade my hardware to keep up with Rogers’ manipulations of my service?!?!
Re: Technical Issue
@Peter
if your router does not support “255” as a valid address element, you’re supposed to complain to your hardware manufacturer for making a faulty product.