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

201–210 of 364 posts

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

#201
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also allow for websites to look HTTPs-enabled, but the transfer happens in clear text, e.g.: Client -(HTTPS)> CloudFlare -(HTTP)> Server. For a company that allegedly is privacy first, this is a huge violation of trust. I also know about some people that run websites that can't get Stripe because they can't figure out how to configure SSL for their website, they just plug in CloudFlare in front, and now they can…

The threat model of MiTM attacks leans heavily towards the client side than the Cloudflare -> origin connection. It's not perfect and it would be fantastic if everyone could setup SSL on their origin servers, but in the end there's are more script kiddies in coffeeshops than there are tier1 isps trying to steal your data

Flexiable SSL by Cloudflare should itself be considered a MiTM Attack and should be opposed by all security standards, organizations, and anyone that values privacy or security, this highlights the inherent problem with SSL in the first place.

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

#202

Pushed a shell script to compare all of them from your location: https://github.com/cleanbrowsing/dnsperftest $ sh ./dnstest.sh |sort -k 22 -n test1 test2 test3 test4 test5 test6 test7 test8 test9 test10 Average cloudflare 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 4 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1.30 norton 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2.00 neustar 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 1 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 22 ms 3.90 cleanbrowsing 11…

[deleted]

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

#203

Pushed a shell script to compare all of them from your location: https://github.com/cleanbrowsing/dnsperftest $ sh ./dnstest.sh |sort -k 22 -n test1 test2 test3 test4 test5 test6 test7 test8 test9 test10 Average cloudflare 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 4 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1.30 norton 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2.00 neustar 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 1 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 22 ms 3.90 cleanbrowsing 11…

Oddly, I also got the best performance from Norton. An MTR shows Norton at 5 hops, Google at 8 hops and Cloudflare at 7. I might even accept slower speeds for added privacy, luckily I don't have to.

               test1   test2   test3   test4   test5   test6   test7   test8   test9   test10  Average 
  norton         5 ms    6 ms    5 ms    6 ms    5 ms    5 ms    6 ms    6 ms    5 ms    6 ms      5.50
  neustar        6 ms    6 ms    6 ms    6 ms    6 ms    5 ms    6 ms    5 ms    6 ms    6 ms      5.80
  cloudflare     7 ms    7 ms    7 ms    7 ms    7 ms    7 ms    7 ms    7 ms    7 ms    7 ms      7.00
  cleanbrowsing  16 ms   31 ms   16 ms   16 ms   16 ms   16 ms   16 ms   16 ms   16 ms   16 ms     17.50
  google         14 ms   5 ms    5 ms    13 ms   5 ms    121 ms  5 ms    14 ms   12 ms   12 ms     20.60
  opendns        11 ms   5 ms    5 ms    18 ms   5 ms    131 ms  5 ms    12 ms   12 ms   5 ms      20.90
  comodo         34 ms   34 ms   34 ms   34 ms   33 ms   34 ms   34 ms   33 ms   33 ms   34 ms     33.70
  quad9          45 ms   46 ms   49 ms   44 ms   44 ms   44 ms   44 ms   56 ms   45 ms   45 ms     46.20
  yandex         144 ms  148 ms  148 ms  146 ms  153 ms  143 ms  148 ms  180 ms  148 ms  148 ms    150.60
  adguard        156 ms  167 ms  150 ms  149 ms  151 ms  146 ms  147 ms  148 ms  189 ms  147 ms    155.00

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

#204
post #109
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The YouTube cache is probably there not to increase performance for you, but to reduce ISP cost (ISP pays for all data received from outside of their network)

That's a strange way of looking at it. ISPs take all sorts of actions to both increase performance to customers, and to reduce their costs.

A competent ISP operating in good faith will execute and expand peering agreements when it makes economic sense to do so.

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

#205
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, Virgin Media did this in the UK and messed it up badly. Every day at 6pm YouTube would stop working until the following morning. It appeared to work by inspecting DNS packets and replying with overrides if necessary. I didn’t like it but I could understand that. What I did not agree with was the fact that this also happened for other DNS services. Google DNS and OpenDNS both experienced the same issue, as did a…

Again, it's probably _not_ Virgin's fault or responsibility. Capacity planning is handled by Google directly. Also, I think that virtually every ISP with more than a few tens of thousands users is hosting a GGC instance nowadays (and a Netflix OpenCache, etc. etc.). Nowadays, the vast majority of the transit&peering of ISPs is not going to the Internet, but to a few racks of local caching servers managed by OTT opera…

[deleted]

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

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, isn’t Unbound a better shout if you’re not going to be fiddling with it? Just install, run, and edit /etc/resolv.conf to point at 127.0.0.1.

Well, you're describing exactly how to do it with bind9 :) What make you say Unbound is better?

I prefer Unbound as it lets me set a min-ttl. This of course is taboo and comes with caveats, so you have to know what you are doing and the implications. Unbound has better support for DNSSEC as well.

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

#207
post #203

Pushed a shell script to compare all of them from your location: https://github.com/cleanbrowsing/dnsperftest $ sh ./dnstest.sh |sort -k 22 -n test1 test2 test3 test4 test5 test6 test7 test8 test9 test10 Average cloudflare 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 4 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1.30 norton 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2.00 neustar 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 1 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 22 ms 3.90 cleanbrowsing 11…

Oddly, I also got the best performance from Norton. An MTR shows Norton at 5 hops, Google at 8 hops and Cloudflare at 7. I might even accept slower speeds for added privacy, luckily I don't have to. test1 test2 test3 test4 test5 test6 test7 test8 test9 test10 Average norton 5 ms 6 ms 5 ms 6 ms 5 ms 5 ms 6 ms 6 ms 5 ms 6 ms 5.50 neustar 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms 5 ms 6 ms 5 ms 6 ms 6 ms 5.80 cloudflare 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms 7…

What ISP/city you tested it from?

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

#208
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…

Comcast... before changing DNS on my network, I tested a variety of DNS providers including Comcast. While Comcast had the best individual test minimum and average times, Comcast repeated testing showed lost packets and the occasional worst max times.

I don't know why they faired as poorly as they did, but once I realized some network issues could be pinned against DNS packet loss / terrible performance spikes, I changed over to 9.9.9.9 and 8.8.8.8 as the fall back. Home network has been a bit more stable since the change over.

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

#210

Pushed a shell script to compare all of them from your location: https://github.com/cleanbrowsing/dnsperftest $ sh ./dnstest.sh |sort -k 22 -n test1 test2 test3 test4 test5 test6 test7 test8 test9 test10 Average cloudflare 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 4 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1.30 norton 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2.00 neustar 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 1 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 22 ms 3.90 cleanbrowsing 11…

This is cool; thanks for the script.
Post reply on HN