That sounds really bad, they must have many complaints? I thought Virgin were one of the quality ISPs along with companies like BT… perhaps not?
Those are really slow responses… I would consider a different ISP. Really I would be looking for sub 20mS for 80% of the time…
It does make me wonder how many people out there are having app issues because of really slow DNS resolution because of needing to use a non ISP DNS because their ISP DNS service is sub optimal.
I had no idea that some people were having to put up with these shockingly slow speeds.
Perhaps it shows with ISPs you pay for what you get… and there is far more than the simplistic consumer bling of synchronisation speed…
Thanks for the suggestion @Simon-in-Suffolk, but if you are in the SF Bay Area, you will know that you have no choice, Comcast is the king of the road. 
Whoever says Silicon Valley if the tech center of the world?
However, despite of the ISP DNS dismal performance, I have 450 mbps dowm and 15 mbps up, which is not too bad.
I guess you could compensate to make sure you have your own caching DNS resolver … but it’s kind of what you pay your service provider for…
When I was working in Stanford I simply used corporate internet services, but that was many years ago now.
When I had BT many moons ago I found them pretty rubbish. I switched to a smaller ADSL provider and blew their performance out of the window. My neighbours all had BT and switched to sky as they had such bad experience. Now most are with Virgin to get fibre
I think we all experience different things from different providers and in some regions more than some. Being in Suffolk with a much lower population I imagine you get much better overall performance and service, in the burbs of SE London with only one Fibre provider and a shed load of people utilising it ain’t going to be the best.
1 Like
Possibly but DNS I am fairly sure for BT would be a UK wide thing… not regional.
Just looked at most recent Ofcom ISP satisfaction info… BT is is the bottom four most complained ISPs, with better than industry average performance.
Sky seems to be best right now with complaints, and Vodafone worst by quite a degree. Indeed Virgin are worse than average too.
What I would say with Sky… I am a pay TV customer of theirs… it’s hard to make a complaint and change your package, albeit my experience is paytv not broadband… perhaps that is their secret…
. Can’t say I have been that impressed … and I used to work for them…
Would never give Sky my money again I am afraid, years of Murdoch ownership have not worn off. The thought of giving them any more of my hard earned cash gives me the shudders.
As a Sky user with no leanings whatsoever towards the likes of Rupert Murdoch, I have to say that Sky’s service (both from an ISP and Pay TV perspective) has been absolutely fantastic and more or less completely trouble free.
I have also found the performance of their service staff, and of their Pay TV staff to be uniformly extremely good, and unlike some other suppliers these days, very easy to contact by phone.
I have had very few issues on any front in my many years of use of their service, and so I can’t say I’m surprised by their customer satisfaction rating.
The only issue I have had from a technical perspective with Sky was when I was recommended by Roon to switch from Sky’s DNS provider to that of Google. The Sky technical representative informed me that they completely lock down DNS, and so there was no way I could change this. Perhaps a good thing, since the Roon problem I was encountering (lack of provision of appropriate metadata and artwork when using Roon Radio) was resolved by Roon’s latest build update. This leads me to believe that the issue had nothing to do with the performance of Sky’s DNS providers as had previously been suggested by Roon’s technical staff.
… and by the way, I believe that Rupert Murdoch has no stake whatsoever in Sky UK. He did try recently, but luckily unsuccessfully, to take over Sky UK last year. Comcast now have a stake in Sky UK. Are they any better?
I think they are talking about the DNS on their router, which is the same for many ISPs… it just stops issues from consumers fiddling… You can bypass this if you want by telling a host to use a different DNS. If you use Sky, it is their DNS you use by default… there is no real concept of a DNS ‘provider’. By the nature of the internet, DNS is distributed.
However as I said earlier, it is unlikely with a quality ISP it will be beneficial to use a non ISP DNS recursive resolver… my example showed BT is 400% to 500% faster than Google if using BT services… … but it is possible to do.
My issue with Sky customer care is that it can be difficult and even costly to use unless you use their multi service sky packages… mobile/paytv/broadband… and to me that is poor verging on sharp practice… and I have made a complaint about that as well.
Yes Fox sold all their shares in Sky, so Murdoch has no investment now… I think this happened late 2018 after an approx 30 year reign.
Yes, although I don’t think that they have had an active or controlling interest in Sky UK for quite some time before this.
When I was there in the late 90s early 00s, they were definitely part of the landscape… but since then you could well be right.
Yes - I do realize this. I was applying the term “provider” to my Internet Service Provider, ie Sky rather than to the wider distributed nature of DNS.
In my working life my role meant that I was involved fairly regularly in negotiation with Domain Name Registration services on behalf of my employer, but that was some time ago now.
Me too… it could be a source of some real frustrations… I only deal with registrations now as a customer and solution designer.
1 Like
I renew my own domain name once a year, and thankfully that’s it for me as well.
Funny all this talking of Virgin and they have had a major outage today in London, seems to have effected south more. Loads of people not been able to VPN in to work for most of the day.
Usually 4G is a good backup for VPNs / AO VPN when trouble strikes.
1 Like
Right, that is what I would do, and I actually had to switch to my iPhone’s hotspot at one time while in the middle of presenting my screen in a meeting when the ISP network outage occurred !
1 Like
Unfortunately not for the image quality and lag free experience we require, it’s bad enough using my main connection sometimes. I myself also have poor phone reception in my house. I have used all carriers only one works reliably , go outside the front of the house and it’s fine, go in you get next to nothing still.
Perhaps this is a silly question.
I’m still getting this problem (I thought I had solved with a reboot), should I delete the /cache folder or the /database/cache folder, or perhaps both?
Actually, the latter is empty, and the former has sub folders for tidal and Qobuz as well as http, smc and sessions.
I note from the Roon forum that developers are working on a solution.
Thanks for your thoughts …
It’s in the RoonServer directory /cache. It will repopulate after you remove it and restart Roon. Make sure you stop Roon first. Others have managed it by also deleting image cache on the remote. You can do that in settings in the app.