4 ms·
Round trip time for me to 80.80.80.80 is double what it is to 8.8.8.8. So I'm not convinced on the "fast" claim.
by brandon272 10y ago
Round trip time for me to 80.80.80.80 is double what it is to 8.8.8.8. So I'm not convinced on the "fast" claim.
- SimonSelg 10y agoSame here. 118ms vs 29ms (average round trip time).
- oriettaxx 10y agosame for me: dig "Query time" almost double for 80.80.80.80 (vs. 8.8.8.8)
- Symbiote 10y agoFrom Denmark, 80.80.80.80 is actually slightly faster than 8.8.8.8, but the difference is tiny. 80.80.80.80 is always 12ms. Appears to be in Amsterdam. 8.8.8.8 is between 13-60ms, usually 12-25ms. Somewhere in Sweden.
- kyrra 10y agoGoogle has the advantage to anycast their DNS server IP addresses. Use a ping service that will ping an IP from around the globe and you'll see that 8.8.8.8 has sub 20ms RTT time for pings reguardless of country. So you will likely always hit the closest Google datacenter when using 8.8.8.8. 80.80.80.80 seems to be served out of a single datacenter. Based on ping times I'm seeing, it looks like they are hosted in Amsterdam. So it will be slow for most of Asia and the Americas.
- cs02rm0 10y agoI'm getting <1ms from a server in Amsterdam, some hundreds (3-5) of ms from the UK, with some even timing out.
- the_duke 10y agoThe website says they are using anycast as well.
- dsl 10y agoIt looks like they are technically anycasting, but doing it totally wrong. From multiple test locations I am seeing lots of network tromboning. Queries from the US going to Europe and vice versa.
- corobo 10y agoFor this same reason you'll also get better results from CDN services with Google DNS. 8.8.8.8 will lookup a geo record from (almost) your actual location. 80.80.80.80 will look it up from the USA. Any CDNs that are using geo-dns will be way slower than they should be outside the US as you'll have been given a US IP to load the content from.
- sajal83 10y agoGoogle actually implements a workaround to this issue.its called EDNS client subnet. Freenom does not.
- corobo 10y agoAh nice, I'll have to remember that one.
- manigandham 10y agoModern CDNs don't use DNS based routing. If a CDN is doing that then they're not really focused on being fast or reliable.
- mseebach 10y agoThat's not some advantage randomly conferred onto Google, though. That's how you build a fast, global DNS service. Freenom is as fast as their servers allow in north western Europe (assuming they are indeed hosted in Amsterdam), but it's just not fast in the rest of the world.
- chris_wot 10y agoI've always wondered though if you could make a better, more anonymous naming service entirely. I believe GNU has one, I think IPFS has another. These are, after all, just giving a more human understandable way of proving addressing information. On Unix and Unix-like systems there is a resolver, and I would be fascinated to know how hard it would be to literally swap out or choose an entirely new name-to-IP address resolution mechanism at runtime.
- profmonocle 10y agoRTT is >5x higher for me. (~140ms vs ~25ms) I'm in Minneapolis, and the traceroute to 80.80.80.80 ends in Prague.
- nrook 10y agoThat's surprising: With that IP address, you'd expect it to be ten times as slow.