71–80 of 87 posts
I wish either AWS Route 53 or Google Cloud DNS would support being a BIND protocol secondary :(
Route 53 developer here. That's on our roadmap, but in the mean time there is this; https://code.google.com/p/route53d/
I'd be interested in seeing a speed comparison with Cloudflare. Cloudflare's DNS is completely free and it's the fastest DNS service I'm aware of.
"403. That’s an error. Your client does not have permission to get URL /cloud-dns/ from this server. (Client IP address: [my-ipv6-addr]) We're sorry, but this service is not available in your country." Google is denying access to services based on their broken ipv6 geolocation data (they think I am in Tehran, but I'm in London.)
Appear to also hit Google Apps as well as any AppeEngine hosted site.
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.
"403. That’s an error. Your client does not have permission to get URL /cloud-dns/ from this server. (Client IP address: [my-ipv6-addr]) We're sorry, but this service is not available in your country." Google is denying access to services based on their broken ipv6 geolocation data (they think I am in Tehran, but I'm in London.)
Yeah, I'm getting that same premium experience. Appear to also hit Google Apps as well as any AppeEngine hosted site.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
When we say "bad", let's remember that that's very close to the speed of light through fiber.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
When we say "bad", let's remember that that's very close to the speed of light through fiber.