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

Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 Incident on July 14, 2025

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 391 posts

Re: Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 Incident on July 14, 2025

#2

Post by Mindless2112 »

Interesting that traffic didn't return to completely normal levels after the incident.

I recently started using the "luci-app-https-dns-proxy" package on OpenWrt, which is preconfigured to use both Cloudflare and Google DNS, and since DoH was mostly unaffected, I didn't notice an outage. (Though if DoH had been affected, it presumably would have failed over to Google DNS anyway.)

Re: Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 Incident on July 14, 2025

#3

Post by anon7000 »

Mindless2112 wrote: post #2

Interesting that traffic didn't return to completely normal levels after the incident. I recently started using the "luci-app-https-dns-proxy" package on OpenWrt, which is preconfigured to use both Cloudflare and Google DNS, and since DoH was mostly unaffected, I didn't notice an outage. (Though if DoH had been affected, it presumably would have failed over to Google DNS anyway.)

They go into that more towards the end, sounds like some smaller % of servers needed more direct intervention

Re: Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 Incident on July 14, 2025

#4

Post by caconym_ »

Mindless2112 wrote: post #2

Interesting that traffic didn't return to completely normal levels after the incident. I recently started using the "luci-app-https-dns-proxy" package on OpenWrt, which is preconfigured to use both Cloudflare and Google DNS, and since DoH was mostly unaffected, I didn't notice an outage. (Though if DoH had been affected, it presumably would have failed over to Google DNS anyway.)

> Interesting that traffic didn't return to completely normal levels after the incident.

Anecdotally, I figured out their DNS was broken before it hit their status page and switched my upstream DNS over to Google. Haven't gotten around to switching back yet.

Re: Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 Incident on July 14, 2025

#7

Post by radicaldreamer »

caconym_ wrote: post #4
Mindless2112 wrote: post #2

Interesting that traffic didn't return to completely normal levels after the incident. I recently started using the "luci-app-https-dns-proxy" package on OpenWrt, which is preconfigured to use both Cloudflare and Google DNS, and since DoH was mostly unaffected, I didn't notice an outage. (Though if DoH had been affected, it presumably would have failed over to Google DNS anyway.)

> Interesting that traffic didn't return to completely normal levels after the incident. Anecdotally, I figured out their DNS was broken before it hit their status page and switched my upstream DNS over to Google. Haven't gotten around to switching back yet.

What would be a good reason to switch back from Google DNS?

Re: Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 Incident on July 14, 2025

#8

Post by sammy2255 »

radicaldreamer wrote: post #7
caconym_ wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Interesting that traffic didn't return to completely normal levels after the incident. Anecdotally, I figured out their DNS was broken before it hit their status page and switched my upstream DNS over to Google. Haven't gotten around to switching back yet.

What would be a good reason to switch back from Google DNS?

Depends who you trust more with your DNS traffic. I know who I trust more.

Re: Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 Incident on July 14, 2025

#9

Post by jallmann »

Good writeup.

> It’s worth noting that DoH (DNS-over-HTTPS) traffic remained relatively stable as most DoH users use the domain cloudflare-dns.com, configured manually or through their browser, to access the public DNS resolver, rather than by IP address.

Interesting, I was affected by this yesterday. My router (supposedly) had Cloudflare DoH enabled but nothing would resolve. Changing the DNS server to 8.8.8.8 fixed the issues.

Re: Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 Incident on July 14, 2025

#10

Post by sammy2255 »

CuteDepravity wrote: post #5

It's crazy that both 1.1.1.1 and 1.0.0.1 where affected by the same change I guess now we should start using a completely different provider as dns backup Maybe 8.8.8.8 or 9.9.9.9

1.1.1.1 and 1.0.0.1 are served by the same service. It's not advertised as a redundant fully separate backup or anything like that...
Post reply on HN