Benchmarking DNS response times of TLDs • Hacker News Board

Re: Benchmarking DNS response times of TLDs

#91

Post by arthurcolle » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 3:34 PM UTC

arminiusreturns wrote: post #80

st_goliath wrote: post #54

Friendly reminder for people on HN reading this: I know this is actually quite interesting, but before you start worrying about the latency of the name servers of your TLD, you might want to do something about the metric ton of JavaScript on your site and the 25 different 3rd party servers from which you side load most of it. Also those 6 additional servers from which you load a bunch of TTF fonts. Especially if all…

To add to this, one thing people tend to forget is that html has a dns prefetch option for offsite js you absolutely must have. (rel=dns-prefetch) Of course I agree with goliath, which is why I try very hard to write pure html5+css3 with no JS unless absolutely necessary. It is very rarely necessary. When it is, very rarely do I need one of the crazy frameworks, pure js works pretty well. Beyond that, this is why adb…

> rel=dns-prefetch

This is amazing! How could I have missed this? How are the loading times affected when using this option, if you care to share?

Re: Benchmarking DNS response times of TLDs

#92

Post by minxomat » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 3:38 PM UTC

siscia wrote: post #17

A little off topic, but some of you folks have experience with bunnycdn, the company behind the post? Are they fine?

I'm using their bulk pricing for video streaming (from a B2 backend). Works great, support is awesome (fast response, credit when issues occur) and the UI is a breath of fresh air. Everything just works exactly as expected. I can't recommend them enough.

Re: Benchmarking DNS response times of TLDs

#93

Post by captn3m0 » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 3:39 PM UTC

sandGorgon wrote: post #12

Damn the India cctld is the second fastest cctld out there - almost at par with .us . Not sure where the tests were ran - probably in EU/US, so this is actually really good. It pretty much outperforms .com/.net/.org #MakeInIndia

It is operated by Neustar (an American company) under contract from NIXI.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neustar

Re: Benchmarking DNS response times of TLDs

#94

Post by ddeck » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 3:43 PM UTC

uasm wrote: post #90

frereubu wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure - I'll drop them an email to see if they can remember. They changed towards the middle of last year, and it was reported to them by NHS staff rather than them experiencing it first-hand, so their memories may be a bit hazy.

Friendly reminder: you don't really know whether this person truly works for the NHS, as they claim. Don't divulge sensitive information to random people.

Perhaps in general, but in this case the email he's pointing to is an nhs.uk address.

Re: Benchmarking DNS response times of TLDs

#95

Post by neurostimulant » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 3:51 PM UTC

> The biggest shockers were the .info and .org domains that showed really poor performance especially in the 85 percentile range, despite being one of the oldest and well established top-level domains with millions of registered domains each. After some further investigation it appears 4 out of 6 of their nameservers are performing extremely poorly which is the reason for the poor results.

I always thought with all the money collected from ten million .org domains they would have an army of nameservers to make sure latency is low, instead they actually only have 6 nameservers and are performing poorly? Sure it'll probably won't impact real world performance but I'm still disappointed that they seem to be only doing bare minimum. I wonder where those hundred million bucks actually goes?

Re: Benchmarking DNS response times of TLDs

#96

Post by dreamcompiler » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 3:51 PM UTC

Off topic: My first thought was "Andrew Huang has a CDN?" but then remembered he spells his nickname differently. Never mind.

Re: Benchmarking DNS response times of TLDs

#97

Post by johannes1234321 » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 4:01 PM UTC

Avamander wrote: post #87

johannes1234321 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is lots on the DNS already. For the security argument: Consider you run on `example.com` and at a later stage add `[blog|forum|support|...].example.com` suddenly cookies from `example.com` might leak to those Subdomains. If you put cookies on `www.example.com` they won't leak to those.

Not if you set the Domain attribute of the cookie properly, this is a poor software problem, not second-level domain problem.

True, but simple mitigations can be powerful ...

Sidenote: If leaking cookies to your own subdomains is a risk, one might also have other problems already. Point is: I explained the potential risk. Evaluating one has to do oneself

Re: Benchmarking DNS response times of TLDs

#98

Post by Aissen » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 4:05 PM UTC

That's something for which we might want to see the raw data: to sort by region, see other percentiles, analyze whether it's bunnycdn's connectivity ?

Also, it might be nice to be able to re-do the tests; better yet: have a website that's auto-updated so that we see results today (maybe TLD X had an incident when they were measuring?). Of course, that's not something you can ask a random stranger on the internet to do for you.

Re: Benchmarking DNS response times of TLDs

#99

Post by Karunamon » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 4:07 PM UTC

frereubu wrote: post #16

We have a client who insisted on using a .house domain. It kept triggering alerts on our uptime monitoring service with DNS errors, so we had to reduce the sensitivity of that specific test. We also had a client who had to change their TLD from .healthcare to .org.uk because (a) people were confused because they didn't understand that there are all these new TLDs and kept adding .co.uk, .org etc and (b) some NHS syst…

There are many broken web forms out there that didn't support perfectly legitimate ccTLDs, and that's before the floodgates were thrown open. There's lots of silly ideas out there on how to validate an email address, and almost nobody uses the right one.

(To wit: Deliver to it, and if it doesn't send, that's the user's problem)

Re: Benchmarking DNS response times of TLDs

#100

Post by Ayesh » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 4:09 PM UTC

arminiusreturns wrote: post #80

st_goliath wrote: post #54

Friendly reminder for people on HN reading this: I know this is actually quite interesting, but before you start worrying about the latency of the name servers of your TLD, you might want to do something about the metric ton of JavaScript on your site and the 25 different 3rd party servers from which you side load most of it. Also those 6 additional servers from which you load a bunch of TTF fonts. Especially if all…

To add to this, one thing people tend to forget is that html has a dns prefetch option for offsite js you absolutely must have. (rel=dns-prefetch) Of course I agree with goliath, which is why I try very hard to write pure html5+css3 with no JS unless absolutely necessary. It is very rarely necessary. When it is, very rarely do I need one of the crazy frameworks, pure js works pretty well. Beyond that, this is why adb…

You can go ahead a step and `preconnect` to a particular URL if you know it. This includes dns prefetching but goes ahead and initializes an HTTP connection.