![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 30. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Sigolene on January 11, 2001, at 11:10:20
Dr Bob,
I've noticed that there is less people talking on PB medications issues. I wonder if it could be possible that a lot of people where "lost" during the problem on this site, at the end of december.
Personnally, i was unable to use the old link to PB during 3 weeks. I was lucky to have personnal e-mails adress of other people, who sent me an other link to PB, which was working. Otherwise, I could have never be able to come back. But the people who don't have this luck, maybe they keep waiting.....
Sigolène
Posted by Ted on January 11, 2001, at 18:32:43
In reply to lost people, posted by Sigolene on January 11, 2001, at 11:10:20
Dr. Bob,
Sigolène is right! All of the groups are *much* quieter now.
I was wondering: Could (would) you send a notification email to all registered people letting them know the new URL?
Ted
> Dr Bob,
>
> I've noticed that there is less people talking on PB medications issues. I wonder if it could be possible that a lot of people where "lost" during the problem on this site, at the end of december.
Posted by name on January 11, 2001, at 18:44:56
In reply to lost people, posted by Sigolene on January 11, 2001, at 11:10:20
The psycho-babble page rolled over into the archive in about 11 days after Dec. 31, which is consistent with the rate of roll-over for most of 2000. Roll-over is one indicator of useage, since the pages are set to archive after a consistent number of contributions.
Posted by Cam W. on January 11, 2001, at 19:22:54
In reply to lost people, posted by Sigolene on January 11, 2001, at 11:10:20
Sigolene - Welcome back. I think that people will start drifting back in, slowly (as you have). I am seeing the link to this site on many more other sites that I have been checking out while surfing, recently. It will just be a matter of time.
Hope all is well with you - Cam
Posted by stjames on January 11, 2001, at 19:50:52
In reply to Re: lost people » Sigolene, posted by Cam W. on January 11, 2001, at 19:22:54
Hmmm..... I hope everybody gets back here but maybe Dr Bob could send an e-mail to all registered users telling them "Babble is back !".
Dr Bob, what do you think ?james
Posted by Sigolene on January 12, 2001, at 4:45:12
In reply to Re: lost people, posted by stjames on January 11, 2001, at 19:50:52
Yes, but this message should contain the URL of psycho bable. Saying PB is back is not enough, because the old link is out of service.
Sigolène> Hmmm..... I hope everybody gets back here but maybe Dr Bob could send an e-mail to all registered users telling them "Babble is back !".
> Dr Bob, what do you think ?
>
> james
Posted by stjames on January 12, 2001, at 11:47:45
In reply to Re: lost people, posted by Sigolene on January 12, 2001, at 4:45:12
> Yes, but this message should contain the URL of psycho bable. Saying PB is back is not enough, because the old link is out of service.
> Sigolène
>James here....
Huh ? The link (URL) is the same as it has always been. http://www.dr-bob.org/babble
james
Posted by name on January 12, 2001, at 13:26:00
In reply to lost people, posted by Sigolene on January 11, 2001, at 11:10:20
Because the Domain Name System is a distributed service, sometimes when a web designer chooses a new IP to host their domain, several Internet routers will still read the old, cached domain information and will send that URL to the old IP. It sometimes takes a while for the new IP information for a URL to be cached throughout the distributed DNS.
Posted by stjames on January 12, 2001, at 15:31:59
In reply to Re: lost people, posted by name on January 12, 2001, at 13:26:00
Actually it happens very quickly now, the "ripple effect" does not take more than a day to resolve.
Dr Bob changed his IP 3 weeks ago, so this issue
would last a day at most. Even if someone was doing DNS caching this would of resolved by now.James
Posted by name on January 12, 2001, at 19:14:33
In reply to lost people, posted by Sigolene on January 11, 2001, at 11:10:20
If a person can enter www.dr-bob.org/babble in a browser, and not end up at the Verio server, something is amiss in the process. Though the URL for dr-bob.org is now delegated to 161.58.153.232, failure of some browsers to direct a www.dr-bob.org query to that server would seem to suggest that either:
* the individual browser has stored a linked URL as the old resolved IP number,
* an ISP is not querying an accredited registry to get updated resolution of URL for recently visited domains,
* an isolated registry somewhere in the world has not updated, or
* another breakdown in the URL delegation and resolution process.Whichever answer solves this apparent riddle, the fact that www.dr-bob-org requests might not always reach 161.58.153.232 presents an interesting opportunity to discover possible bugs in ICANN's evolving URL delegation and IP resolution process, or in browswer softwares or ISP protocols used to direct URLs to IPs.
Posted by name on January 12, 2001, at 19:21:18
In reply to lost people, posted by Sigolene on January 11, 2001, at 11:10:20
The other obvious possibility is that the old link is not really out of service, but that someone incorrectly reported that the old link is out of service, after setting a link as the IP number instead of the URL.
Posted by stjames on January 12, 2001, at 19:47:34
In reply to Re: lost people, posted by name on January 12, 2001, at 19:14:33
> If a person can enter www.dr-bob.org/babble in a browser, and not end up at the Verio server, something is amiss in the process. Though the URL for dr-bob.org is now delegated to 161.58.153.232, failure of some browsers to direct a www.dr-bob.org query to that server would seem to suggest that either:
>
> * the individual browser has stored a linked URL as the old resolved IP number,I am not aware of browswers themselves doing name to IP resolution, the resolution happens on the local (generally) DNS server. There was a confusion a few weeks ago, but the update to internic, therefor the servers doing DNS for .com,
fixed this within a few hours.
> * an ISP is not querying an accredited registry to get updated resolution of URL for recently visited domains,If they are not querying the 9 root servers which would redirect to the .com DNS and then to athorative DNS server for resolution of name to IP
they are misconfigured. The exception that I can think of is a DNS caching server but where I have used this the cache is updated often from the net.
Otherwise any DNS cache (not including a DNS caching server) on client or local host is short lived (mins on a busy DNS server but no more than hours)> * an isolated registry somewhere in the world has not updated, or
They all should direct to a root server so there is no confusion, per RFC(s).
> * another breakdown in the URL delegation and resolution process.
>
> Whichever answer solves this apparent .riddle, .the fact that www.dr-bob-org requests might not always reach 161.58.153.232 presents an interesting opportunity to discover possible bugs in ICANN's evolving URL delegation and IP resolution process, or in browswer softwares or ISP protocols used to direct URLs to IPs.I can't reproduce this despite trying several shell accounts connected to different backbones
throughout the world. Nslookup returns correct IP The root servers have been resolving (using proper query as root servers don't generally resolve name to IP) since Dr. Bob
updated internic.
Posted by stjames on January 12, 2001, at 19:51:36
In reply to Re: lost people, posted by name on January 12, 2001, at 19:21:18
> The other obvious possibility is that the old link is not really out of service, but that someone incorrectly reported that the old link is out of service, after setting a link as the IP number instead of the URL.
James here....
If I understand you my answer would be that this is why it is better to use name instead of IP, as IP can change but name should resolve to IP correctly.
James
Posted by stjames on January 12, 2001, at 19:55:17
In reply to Re: lost people, posted by stjames on January 12, 2001, at 19:51:36
I would suspect you and I are the only ones that
are really understanding any of this ! Perhaps this should go off list ?(if you would like)
Posted by name on January 12, 2001, at 20:07:56
In reply to Re: lost people, posted by stjames on January 12, 2001, at 19:51:36
I would put my money on the error being in the report here about the link being broken, rather than a break somewhere in the system, for the reasons you describe. But I have this fuzzy memory of some break in the system last year in which an isolated area could not resolve URLs. Do you remember anything about that happening in past few months?
By the way, I don't think the whois listings are updated for the new server.
Posted by name on January 12, 2001, at 21:19:39
In reply to Re: lost people, posted by name on January 12, 2001, at 19:21:18
yeh, yer right. The upshot is, if anybody thinks the old "link" doesn't work for them, they should type http://www.dr-bob.org/babble in the address bar at the top of their browser. If that does not get them to the site, it might be a matter of general concern.
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 13, 2001, at 0:00:55
In reply to lost people, posted by Sigolene on January 11, 2001, at 11:10:20
> I've noticed that there is less people talking on PB medications issues. I wonder if it could be possible that a lot of people where "lost" during the problem on this site, at the end of december.
I was afraid of that, but it seems to me things have picked up pretty quickly. If you're interested, in addition to the old statistics page:
http://www.dr-bob.org/stats.html
they offer this flashy new one here, which I think I finally have working:
> I was wondering: Could (would) you send a notification email to all registered people letting them know the new URL?
I almost did that -- during those transitional days when the pages (and the registration data) were back, but the URL was still in flux. Finally I decided not to, because there might be people out there who don't want an email about psycho-anything showing up in their in-box...
> I would put my money on the error being in the report here about the link being broken, rather than a break somewhere in the system
I don't know if this is what happened to Sigolène, but the URL business was complicated because this site also used to share uhs.bsd.uchicago.edu, and it wasn't until yesterday (!) that we were finally able to resolve (pun intended) what was going to happen to that name. Now all it does is redirect people.
If anyone's trying to get here with the old *numeric* address, well, as James said, they shouldn't be doing that. :-) If there's yet *another* address that people are trying, please let me know!
Bob
Posted by mars on January 13, 2001, at 8:07:45
In reply to lost people, posted by Sigolene on January 11, 2001, at 11:10:20
Hey wonderful people -
I had a thing happen while the site was down. I couldn't connect, of course, and kept trying, and knew that the uhs.bsd server was down. (I'm a geek girl.) So I finally e-mailed Dr. Bob, and he gave me a numeric IP address. That allowed me to figure out that my ISP's DNS server had two addresses for Dr. Bob - but it was really weird, if i issued the command to resolve the OLD IP address to a domain name it would resolve it to a uhs.bsd address.
If this makes any sense, you are a more knowledgeable critter than I. I guess what I am trying to say is that some folks *might* have DNS problems.
Just for the record.
cheers,
mary
Posted by mars on January 13, 2001, at 8:18:45
In reply to Re: lost people, posted by mars on January 13, 2001, at 8:07:45
Oops -
P.S. Forgot to tell you that i contacted my ISP - there is a suspected problem with Windows 2000 where the cache won't let go of resolving a domain name to an old IP address.
Do you guys think that it might be a problem with folks not clearing their caches, even if they don't (as is likely) have Win2k?
BTW, I have Windows 2000.
best,
mary
Posted by Ted on January 13, 2001, at 11:57:20
In reply to Re: lost people, posted by Dr. Bob on January 13, 2001, at 0:00:55
Dr. Bob,
> > I was wondering: Could (would) you send a notification email to all registered people letting them know the new URL?
>
> I almost did that -- during those transitional days when the pages (and the registration data) were back, but the URL was still in flux. Finally I decided not to, because there might be people out there who don't want an email about psycho-anything showing up in their in-box...How about a simple email: "I'm back online. My URL is ..."
You need not even mention psycho anything in the message. Anyone who is registered knows who Dr. Bob is. :-)
Ted
Posted by Cam W. on January 13, 2001, at 13:05:28
In reply to Re: lost people » Dr. Bob, posted by Ted on January 13, 2001, at 11:57:20
> You need not even mention psycho anything in the message. Anyone who is registered knows who Dr. Bob is. :-)Ted - Type in "Dr.Bob" into the Google search engine ( http://www.google.com ) and see if everyone knows who Dr.Bob is (I know you said registered people, but it is interesting to see just how many people call themselves 'Dr.Bob'). ;^)
- Cam
Posted by Ted on January 14, 2001, at 20:44:37
In reply to Re: lost people » Ted, posted by Cam W. on January 13, 2001, at 13:05:28
Hi Cam,
Only about 103,000!
But, if you look, our very own Dr. Bob is listed first!
Ted
> > You need not even mention psycho anything in the message. Anyone who is registered knows who Dr. Bob is. :-)
>
> Ted - Type in "Dr.Bob" into the Google search engine ( http://www.google.com ) and see if everyone knows who Dr.Bob is (I know you said registered people, but it is interesting to see just how many people call themselves 'Dr.Bob'). ;^)
>
> - Cam
Posted by Cam W. on January 15, 2001, at 11:00:52
In reply to Re: lost people » Cam W., posted by Ted on January 14, 2001, at 20:44:37
Ted - I would suggest changing the name of this site to Dr.Hsuing's Psycho-Babble, but I tried this in Google and it brought back bad memories. Besides, all the links to this site would have to be changed. Another suggestion for a new name for this site:....Cam's Psycho-Babble or Ted and Cam's Excellent Psycho-Babble.
I doubt that this would go over very well, and all of the links to this site would still have to be changed (sigh).
Dr.Bob - I know, I know - This should be under Psychosocial-Babble, but why interupt such a mind stimulating thread =^P
> Hi Cam,
>
> Only about 103,000!
>
> But, if you look, our very own Dr. Bob is listed first!
>
> Ted
>
>
> > > You need not even mention psycho anything in the message. Anyone who is registered knows who Dr. Bob is. :-)
> >
> > Ted - Type in "Dr.Bob" into the Google search engine ( http://www.google.com ) and see if everyone knows who Dr.Bob is (I know you said registered people, but it is interesting to see just how many people call themselves 'Dr.Bob'). ;^)
> >
> > - Cam
Posted by shar on January 16, 2001, at 23:00:03
In reply to Re: lost people » Ted, posted by Cam W. on January 15, 2001, at 11:00:52
Actually, if it was Dr. Hsuing's board, I would not know how to pronounce it. Possible options would be:
huh-SING
SHWing
sing
SUE-ing (silent h)
huh-SUE-ing
HUH-swingDo you know how it is pronounced?
I sort of like the "excellent adventure" idea.
Shar
Posted by Greg on January 17, 2001, at 13:13:10
In reply to Re: lost people » Ted, posted by Cam W. on January 15, 2001, at 11:00:52
> Ted - I would suggest changing the name of this site to Dr.Hsuing's Psycho-Babble, but I tried this in Google and it brought back bad memories. Besides, all the links to this site would have to be changed. Another suggestion for a new name for this site:....Cam's Psycho-Babble or Ted and Cam's Excellent Psycho-Babble.
And I suppose you'd still expect Dr. Bob to run and maintain the site, right? I would... :)
and I like Greg and Cam's Excellent Psycho Babble much better...
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.