4 ms·
Numbers from South America: Freenom: ~260msec Google: ~70msec Local ISP: ~6msec
by gtirloni 10y ago
Numbers from South America:
Freenom: ~260msec
Google: ~70msec
Local ISP: ~6msec
- Sarkie 10y agoI hope they are more anonymous than they are fast...
- bcook 10y agoNumbers from South-East US: Freenom: ~9ms Google: ~9ms (actually 0.5 ms quicker) Local ISP: ~33ms
- raisedbyninjas 10y agoFrom Texas: Freenom: 140ms Google: 2ms Level3: 1ms
- paraboul 10y agoFrom France (free) : Freenom: ~60ms Google: ~3ms Local ISP: ~1ms
- corobo 10y agoTry with a domain that doesn't exist. The response time topped 10 seconds for me on the first one I tried. For a handful that do exist it seems like they're almost exactly 10 times slower than Google. ~20ms (Google) vs ~200.
- tdkl 10y agoIt still baffles me why would someone use Google DNS over local ISPs and 8.8.8.8 being advertised anywhere make me cringe.
- the_duke 10y agoBecause while I have a great and fast internet connection, my ISP's DNS is notoriously slow with constant outages.
- WildUtah 10y agoMy ISP's DNS inserts advertising into query results. Google's doesn't.
- tdkl 10y agoSorry to hear that then. I'm positive this doesn't happen in the EU though, yet we're willingly giving Google more data.
- minxomat 10y agoIt does happen: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13038500 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13038500
- gulaschbrot 10y agoHappens in Germany with Deutsche Telekom.
- rrdharan 10y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_hijacking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_hijacking As far as I know Time Warner Cable/Spectrum still does this?
- toast0 10y agoMany people don't have meaningful choices of ISPs, and some ISPs only run a couple resolver clusters far away from customers, are just plain bad at running them, or are playing DNS MITM games.
- lazyant 10y agoTry namebench https://github.com/google/namebench https://github.com/google/namebench , it will give you the fastest name servers for your case (location plus usage)
- feld 10y agoBecause local ISPs are terrible at running DNS. They're slow, usually vulnerable, poorly scaled, and not very redundant. I've seen a lot of ISPs in the US have "outages" that are merely "our DNS servers are down, so everyone thinks the internet is down".
- tyingq 10y agoGoogle's cache is more likely to already be populated with the answer than any ISP other than the huge ones.
- incompatible 10y agoISPs in some countries are forced by the government to block certain websites, which they typically implement with domain name blocking.
- notzorbo3 10y agoFrom the Netherlands: Pings: Freenom: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 17.509/20.928/26.588/3.520 ms Google: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 18.013/21.057/24.841/2.500 ms Actual resolve times: (dig @8.8.8.8 example.com): Freenom: ;; Query time: 19 msec (avg) Google: ;; Query time: 31 (21) msec (avg) Averages over 10 pings / digs. The google query time had two outliers at ~49 ms. If I discount those, it's about 21 ms. But I don't see why I'd discount them.
- tscs37 10y agoFrom Germany: Freenom: ~34ms Google: ~8ms Local ISP: ~11ms
- gwu78 10y agoFrom anywhere: Local cache on 127.0.0.1: ~0msec Local nameserver on 127.0.0.1: ~0msec /etc/hosts: ~0msec