Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Cloud DNS

developers.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 87 posts

Re: Google Cloud DNS

#51

Post by ithkuil »

scott_karana wrote: post #45
rdl wrote: post #20

I wish either AWS Route 53 or Google Cloud DNS would support being a BIND protocol secondary :(

No kidding. I love the local speeds, and no doubt Google and Amazon do a good job of redundancy, but I'm sure as hell not going to put all my eggs in one basket. Not with DNS. I had the same problem earlier this year, and if Rackspace or Route53 had AXFR support, I would have used them in a heartbeat...

axfr support might be useful even if you end up using them as primary:

1. migration

2. standard "config" API. You just keep up using your scripts to generate/update bind/tinydns configs.

Re: Google Cloud DNS

#52

Post by takeda »

gibybo wrote: post #50
ithkuil wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you need DNS based failover you want low TTLs , e.g Google.com A record is 100s

Still though, aren't most consumers using their ISP's DNS servers, which will cache the same response for all of their customers in a region?

It all depends on how high ttl is, the number of queries increase exponentially as you decrease it, with ttl=0 you have no caching.

My company makes about 160qps which translates to about half billion per month, so it doesn't seem too unrealistic.

Re: Google Cloud DNS

#53

Post by squeaky-clean »

scott_karana wrote: post #44
tedivm wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're an Australian Internet User. You want to see hampsterdance.com 'cause fuck it, you like hamsters. Your computer asks your ISP's DNS server for the record. If your ISP has it cached you're golden, but it turns out it probably isn't. So your ISP needs to go to ask the hampsterdance.com DNS server directly. If that server is in the United States then you're stuck waiting 133ms in one direction, 133ms back- you've…

You're point is solid, but can you clear up some confusion for me? I'm not sure whether: 1) Round-trip times from Australia to the USA are truly as bad as 266ms 2) You're confusing ping's RTTs with one-way trips 3) You're assuming DNS has a syn/ack, which it doesn't. EDIT: I suspect you realize there's no syn/ack in DNS based on your other comments... :)

I live on the east coast of the USA. Speedtest.net says my ping to my nearest server is 26ms, and to Sydney is 259ms. So it seems it really is that bad.

Re: Google Cloud DNS

#55

Post by biot »

jread wrote: post #36

It's a start - barebones authoritative DNS only - no monitoring/failover, load balancing, Geo, LBR, etc - provisioning via API only. Route 53 started out this way, and has since added many of these features and now has almost 7% Alexa 10k marketshare and rapidly growing. I created a browser test that measures recursive DNS query times. You can test Google DNS query performance using this link: http://bit.ly/1nY4e60

Please don't post mystery meat URLs. The bit.ly link goes to: http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest/run?services_CDN=&serviceT...

Re: Google Cloud DNS

#56

Post by kapsel »

MBlume wrote: post #11

Was this announced by Google today, or is this on HN because of the XKCD? If the former, did Google push the announcement because of the XKCD?

Not sure, but this one is funny:

dig +short -t txt google-public-dns-a.google.com

Re: Google Cloud DNS

#57

Post by gabemart »

tedivm wrote: post #10

I'm wondering how Dyn is taking this. These guys have been working on DNS for years, and were probably one of the first "managed DNS" or "enterprise DNS" services. Over time though they've failed to really innovate, or even keep up with standard (you can't use any of their value add services like the global traffic manager if you also want to use DNSSEC, for instance). Despite this their prices have remained ridiculo…

Can anyone recommend a cheap DNS service that does geographic-based load distribution? I know that Route53 offers something like this, but AFAIK it's only designed for products hosted on Amazon's platforms.

I've heard that geographic-based DNS has something of a bad reputation, but I think it would be a very good fit for a side project I'm working on.

Re: Google Cloud DNS

#58

Post by zimbatm »

gabemart wrote: post #57
tedivm wrote: post #10

I'm wondering how Dyn is taking this. These guys have been working on DNS for years, and were probably one of the first "managed DNS" or "enterprise DNS" services. Over time though they've failed to really innovate, or even keep up with standard (you can't use any of their value add services like the global traffic manager if you also want to use DNSSEC, for instance). Despite this their prices have remained ridiculo…

Can anyone recommend a cheap DNS service that does geographic-based load distribution? I know that Route53 offers something like this, but AFAIK it's only designed for products hosted on Amazon's platforms. I've heard that geographic-based DNS has something of a bad reputation, but I think it would be a very good fit for a side project I'm working on.

DNSMadeEasy for $30/year

Re: Google Cloud DNS

#59

Post by ksec »

There is no point comparing this to AWS Route53. Purely in terms of speed Cloud DNS win Hands Down. I am not sure if the Cloud DNS is the same as their own DNS infrastructure, if so it is pretty damn fast.

The only other two DNS services I recommend is DNSMadeEasy and EdgeCast DNS. Both happens to one of the most affordable as well as fastest. ( Strange combination )

The only bad thing is EdgeCast got brought by Verizon. I am worry if anything bad will happen.

Post reply on HN