Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: TOP Problem  (Read 2871 times)

OnyimBob

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 302
    • http://
TOP Problem
« on: October 05, 2009, 05:31:26 pm »

I am unable to log on to the Online Photographer site in either Firefox, IE or Opera. Using this link http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/ I just get the Done message at the bottom with a blank screen.
Does anyone have a clue what my problem is?
Bob.
Logged
Bob Munro.
[url=http://www.waterholesgue

DarkPenguin

  • Guest
TOP Problem
« Reply #1 on: October 05, 2009, 05:50:33 pm »

The site was down, maybe?

That link works.  This won brings you right to the blog.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/t...blog_index.html

Logged

OnyimBob

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 302
    • http://
TOP Problem
« Reply #2 on: October 05, 2009, 08:52:34 pm »

Quote from: DarkPenguin
The site was down, maybe?

That link works.  This won brings you right to the blog.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/t...blog_index.html
This has been an issue for a month or so now, maybe longer. It's almost as if some setting on my computer is locking it out?
I can log on to his original site which redirects one to the blog, but not me apparently.???
Thanks Mr Penguin.
Logged
Bob Munro.
[url=http://www.waterholesgue

DarkPenguin

  • Guest
TOP Problem
« Reply #3 on: October 05, 2009, 09:12:05 pm »

Very odd.  I'm guessing it is an ISP issue.

I've had some issues with the net in general the past few weeks.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
TOP Problem
« Reply #4 on: October 06, 2009, 06:36:39 am »

Quote from: DarkPenguin
Very odd.  I'm guessing it is an ISP issue.

I've had some issues with the net in general the past few weeks.





Perhaps that's mirrored in the strange things I have noted with LuLa too - gives the sense that it is a weak signal (in a manner of speaking) and in competition with a stronger one, as sometimes with radio.

Rob C
« Last Edit: October 06, 2009, 06:37:05 am by Rob C »
Logged

Justan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1928
    • Justan-Elk.com
TOP Problem
« Reply #5 on: October 06, 2009, 12:09:12 pm »

Without knowing all of what the site uses to generate the page ( do they use java, active-x, other scripting; do they have external links which use any or all of these, do they use one of the flavors of SQL and so on) it is pointless to guess.

A simple test to see if the problem is within the recipient’s ability to do anything about is to change DNS servers your computer uses. In the event you are not familiar with DNS, it is the tool that translates the friendly names we know, such as http://luminous-landscape.com into the underlying IP numbers that are actually used by routers the world over to find addresses and to direct the recipient to the right location. As example, the IP address for the LL web site: 70.86.208.210

DNS is the mechanism which stores and translates both the friendly name and the underlying IP address. If your browser is slow to non responsive when going to one or more web sites, try using the underlying IP address instead. How, you might ask do you get the underlying address? Simple: a tool called ping.

Without going into a long description, use ping as follows: open a command prompt. Type the following, but without the quotation marks, and then hit the Enter key: “ping luminous-landscape.com”

Ping will reply with something like the following:

ping luminous-landscape.com

Pinging luminous-landscape.com [70.86.208.210] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 70.86.208.210: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=51
Reply from 70.86.208.210: bytes=32 time=96ms TTL=51
Reply from 70.86.208.210: bytes=32 time=95ms TTL=51
Reply from 70.86.208.210: bytes=32 time=96ms TTL=51

Ping statistics for 70.86.208.210:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 95ms, Maximum = 100ms, Average = 96ms

By using this ping you can get the IP address. The reply times give you an idea of how fast the response time is. The numbers above are pretty average, bigger numbers imply longer response times.

So the first test is to try the slow site but try it using it’s IP address rather than it’s friendly name. If there is a notable response time difference between using the friendly name and the IP address, they you know that DNS is likely the problem.

BUT what you don’t know yet is if the problem is due to the DNS service your computer uses, or the DNS service that the web site uses. The way to test this is to change the DNS service that your computer uses.

Again, avoiding a long description, if you were to go into the network settings for your computer you will see it wants to know the ip address of  your computer, the computer’s subnet, the address of the router (called the gateway) and the DNS servers.

Most everyone uses the DNS servers provided by their ISP. You can change these by simply adding other DNS address in the area indicated above.

You can find these by looking up DNS servers on the web. It is a good idea to use DNS servers that are fairly close to you. The further away the DNS server, the longer will be the response time.

Make the change and then re-test above. To perfect the test you’ll want to do one more thing after making the change, and this is to flush or reset the DNS information cached in your computer. To do this, go back to the command prompt and type the following without the quotation marks, and then hit the Enter key: “ipconfig /flushdns”

If the response time has decreased then you know the problem is due to your DNS server. If the problem is unchanged then it is likely due to issues with your browser or due to the ISP used by the web site.

One more thing, browsers hold a lot of information in their cache. Sometimes this information is the reason for a problem. If in doubt, go to your browser’s control section (in IE it’s Tools then Internet Options), and tell it to delete browsing history and cookies.

Edit: If changing the DNS numbers creates problems, simply remove the numbers and put the original numbers there or check the box that lets the computer find these numbers automatically.

Hope this helps….
« Last Edit: October 06, 2009, 12:13:19 pm by Justan »
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
TOP Problem
« Reply #6 on: October 06, 2009, 03:33:24 pm »

Justan

I think this is one of those times when the mind just closes down.

I also think it is one of the things that separates the film from the digital mindset. Looking at your post, trying to read it but finding it absolutely impossible to keep the thing understandable on practically any level, it underlines something that I have often thought and sometime said: had I been confronted with digital before film, I probably never would have dreamed of taking up a career in photography; only because of the sound basis of a long film experience have I been able to stick with the digital version and on a no longer professional footing. There is such a divide (for me) that it has become an 'inspite of' love affair with the medium; conditional love.

Rob C

Justan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1928
    • Justan-Elk.com
TOP Problem
« Reply #7 on: October 07, 2009, 12:25:27 pm »

About 36 years ago, during my 3rd year of taking photography classes throughout the school year and over the summers, I was offered an opportunity to teach a course in darkroom techniques at my high school. I remember saying to my teacher “All I know how to do is to mix the chemicals and follow directions.” My teacher said that is about 80% of the task. He added “remaining tasks come from learning something about the chemistry and mostly from the willingness to try.” So I spent some time at one of the UW libraries, researching the chemical compounds used in B&W and put together a course outline that roughly paralleled what I’d learned during my first 2 courses.

I got to teach I think it was 16 students an intro darkroom class focused mostly on processing b&w films and papers. The course lasted a semester and during the time I learned more than I had the 3 years prior. Mostly because I was willing to venture into something where I was initially uncomfortable and didn’t let the risk of failure (and humiliation amongst my peers) get in the way of my goals. I didn’t know it at the time, but I was starting a pattern that has taken me a very long way since then.

In that spirit, I suggest you try using the ping tool I mentioned. It’s easy to use and you won’t damage anything. Once you are comfortable with that you’ll find using other computer diagnostic tools becomes an easier task.

OnyimBob

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 302
    • http://
TOP Problem
« Reply #8 on: October 07, 2009, 05:25:08 pm »

Quote from: Justan
Most everyone uses the DNS servers provided by their ISP. You can change these by simply adding other DNS address in the area indicated above.

You can find these by looking up DNS servers on the web. It is a good idea to use DNS servers that are fairly close to you. The further away the DNS server, the longer will be the response time.
Hi Justan,
I've pinged the site with the following results :
Sorry, couldn't paste it in so I've attached a txt file.
Anyway the long and short of it is that the results show an average response time of 1450 ms - I'm working via satellite broadband here. So obviously my computer is having some form of conversation with ToP, but not via my browser.

With regard to the above quote from your post Justan, I'm always ready to jump in the deep end but you'll have to be more explicit about this dns  address stuff!  

Thanks for your help.
Bob.
Logged
Bob Munro.
[url=http://www.waterholesgue

Justan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1928
    • Justan-Elk.com
TOP Problem
« Reply #9 on: October 09, 2009, 11:07:37 am »

The text document didn’t open. The attachment says it’s 4 bytes, which isn’t enough for much more than the document itself. But your statement that the “average response time of 1450 ms” tells the story.

Satellite really sucks due to time delay. This is in part because the open air interface it uses is highly subject to errors. The term for this delay is latency. Because of the way it works, satellite can have a lot of latency. That’s probably why it takes 1450 ms.

You can test to see if the 1450 ms is consistent by trying the same ping test with other sites, such as Google.com yahoo.com or pick  your destination.com If all are more or less consistent, then it’s probably the satellite network causing the latency. If it varies greatly then it is due to something between you and the particular destination.

There are occasions when the latency is so great that the system gives up and part of the packets that were supposed to get back to you never make it. This sounds like what you are experiencing.

But you can try different DNS servers and see if that is the reason for the problem. Note that because you are on satellite, you might be required to use your ISP’s DNS servers. This is not the case for most broadband.

Anyway, the test is simple. Note the current DNS settings and write them down exactly as you see them. Put in the DNS settings from one of the public vendors you found on Google. After that use a command window and run the ipconfig /flushdns command and see if your browser responds any more quickly.

For the sake of completeness, you can get your computer’s current IP information by going to a command prompt and typing

Ipconfig /all

Then hitting Enter

Ipconfig /all will show you most everything you want to know about your network configuration. Note that towards the bottom of this display, you’ll see the entry for DNS servers. Note the numbers associated with that.

It is good to use DNS settings from at least 2 different providers. All internet based services have problems from time to time and by using different DNS providers you have a greater chance of providing a fail over mechanism when the need arises.
Pages: [1]   Go Up