Live data from Hacker News

DNS Performance compared: CloudFlare 1.1.1.1 x Google 8.8.8.8 x Quad9 x OpenDNS

medium.com

71–80 of 364 posts

Re: DNS Performance compared: CloudFlare 1.1.1.1 x Google 8.8.8.8 x Quad9 x OpenDNS

#71

Is there a tutorial on setting up your own? I've got a huge hosts file and would like it to affect all the devices at my home but setting up a DNS server always seemed high-level black magic to me.

On Linux, the easiest thing to do is to install busybox; it has a DNS server, dnsd. It will accept your hosts file directly.

Re: DNS Performance compared: CloudFlare 1.1.1.1 x Google 8.8.8.8 x Quad9 x OpenDNS

#72
Mentally you need to add a big asterisk to tests of CDNs, and by extension "dns done like a cdn" from VPS provider networks (content networks). That's not where users come from (eyeball networks), and therefore not where they focus their efforts in peering and route-optimizing.

Re: DNS Performance compared: CloudFlare 1.1.1.1 x Google 8.8.8.8 x Quad9 x OpenDNS

#73
This tests the performance / distance between vps data centers and the dns server's data centers. imho it's better to have a test web page that consumers visit and establishes a tcp connection to those dns services and estimate the rtt of a single packet from the time it took to establish the connection, or test via the https interface for services that support it.

Re: DNS Performance compared: CloudFlare 1.1.1.1 x Google 8.8.8.8 x Quad9 x OpenDNS

#74

I think we'll start seeing the standard configuration of 1.1.1.1,8.8.8.8 everywhere. Google/Cloudflare tackled the UX of free DNS spectacularly with these gold IP addresses. It's the primary reason I use them instead of OpenDNS, which was an earlier player in this space.

I wonder how much Cloudflare paid/pays for the 1.1.1.1

Re: DNS Performance compared: CloudFlare 1.1.1.1 x Google 8.8.8.8 x Quad9 x OpenDNS

#75
post #42
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

9.9.9.9 does not pass along EDNS client subnet resulting in wrong geo-located responses. It is their "feature".

According to the FAQ[1], they also offer 9.9.9.10, which passes client subnet at the cost of other features. [1] https://www.quad9.net/faq

[deleted]

Re: DNS Performance compared: CloudFlare 1.1.1.1 x Google 8.8.8.8 x Quad9 x OpenDNS

#77
post #42
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

9.9.9.9 does not pass along EDNS client subnet resulting in wrong geo-located responses. It is their "feature".

According to the FAQ[1], they also offer 9.9.9.10, which passes client subnet at the cost of other features. [1] https://www.quad9.net/faq

Should, but does not.

  dig @8.8.8.8 o-o.myaddr.test.l.google.com txt +short 
  "74.125.46.11"
  "edns0-client-subnet 94.181.44.185/32"
  dig @9.9.9.10 o-o.myaddr.test.l.google.com txt +short
  "2620:171:57::240"

Re: DNS Performance compared: CloudFlare 1.1.1.1 x Google 8.8.8.8 x Quad9 x OpenDNS

#78

I think we'll start seeing the standard configuration of 1.1.1.1,8.8.8.8 everywhere. Google/Cloudflare tackled the UX of free DNS spectacularly with these gold IP addresses. It's the primary reason I use them instead of OpenDNS, which was an earlier player in this space.

Be careful with that, Google DNS (as an example) will start ignoring your DNS requests if you go over the rate-limit. Not an issue for home users, but an issue for any sizeable business.

Re: DNS Performance compared: CloudFlare 1.1.1.1 x Google 8.8.8.8 x Quad9 x OpenDNS

#79
post #60
post #56

Which ISPs are so bad that you want to use external services, which are further in distance than your ISP, for speed? When I test with my ISP, they beat all of these services (both IPv4 and IPv6). They're simply closer to me in terms of hops. My router is another story though. The Fritzbox (>200eur router) adds 6ms of latency, and that's what is advertised over DHCP. (Might still be fine, since cached queries are fas…

My isp got the brilliant idea of rolling their own YouTube cache servers. It's great in theory but in or active they're under powered and so at peak hours I can't even stream 240p on my 500mbits connection. I've had to block their cache servers in my firewall for YouTube to be butter smooth at 1080p consistently. Another example is bell Canada who used to mine your DNS queries to profile you for ads, or ISPs that hig…

>My isp got the brilliant idea of rolling their own YouTube cache servers

Are YouTube videos not served using https? Sounds like it's google/YouTube servers but they're underprovsioned

Re: DNS Performance compared: CloudFlare 1.1.1.1 x Google 8.8.8.8 x Quad9 x OpenDNS

#80

Quad9 has several IPs and different services, see ( https://www.heise.de/imgs/18/2/3/1/7/9/4/7/quad9-feature-mat... ). For some reason this is hidden on the quad9 website.

  dig @9.9.9.11 +short
  ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
  dig @9.9.9.12 +short
  ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
Post reply on HN