5 ms·
From a security and privacy standpoint I think DoH is a good thing. I wish it didn't have the overhead of TCP/HTTP (which is why I was a bigger fan of DNSCrypt
by mike_d 7y ago
From a security and privacy standpoint I think DoH is a good thing.
I wish it didn't have the overhead of TCP/HTTP (which is why I was a bigger fan of DNSCrypt). Anyone can stand up a resolver that can handle 50k UDP requests a second and operate a public resolver. It starts to get operationally dicey to stand up infrastructure that can do 50k HTTP requests a second. As a result you end up with a small handful of players who can operate medium to large scale public resolvers.
- tptacek 7y agoI don't buy it. At 50k requests per second, you're servicing a lot of users. Cost of customer acquisition dominates cost of serving the marginal 1000 HTTP requests. UDP doesn't make that business any more viable.
- mike_d 7y agoWhy does it need to be a business? A network of decentralized recursive resolvers operated by a number of different parties is preferable in almost every way to CloudFlare running a single endpoint. The NTP pool works quite well on this model. It would be a much larger commitment for participants had to manage stateful connections.
- bzbz 7y agoI don't think parent commenter is implying it has to be a commercial application. Imagine something released with little-to-no cost, with community-driven support and users that organically find the page. Not all services are commercial.