3 ms·
Depends on your region and what sites you're using. I live in the middle of nowhere far from civilization, and 1.1.1.1 returns terrible IPs for many sites inclu
by 5e92cb50239222b 3y ago
Depends on your region and what sites you're using. I live in the middle of nowhere far from civilization, and 1.1.1.1 returns terrible IPs for many sites including google.com (which pings at 350-400 ms if you resolve it through 1.1.1.1, but at 90-100 ms if you're using any other resolver). They do it because they block EDNS0 in order to protect your privacy or something like that.
So I use 8.8.8.8 and 9.9.9.9 in parallel through dnsmasq. Whoever responds the first wins. If you're not stuck in the middle of nowhere, you're probably better off with the latter as it's somewhat more trustworthy than Google.
https://quad9.net/ https://quad9.net/
- bayindirh 3y agoIsn't enabling "query all DNS servers in parallel" discouraged in DNSMasq? Instead I increase the directory size to 4K and be done with it.
- 5e92cb50239222b 3y agoMaybe. I don't recommend it for the typical user of this site (probably could have phrased that one better — I believe `EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK` should use 9.9.9.9 instead of Google or Cloudflare, not that they should implement my parallel bullshit). It makes sense here because of bad peering: 8.8.8.8 may be responding in 90 ms right now, but could very well start taking 200 ms a few hours later. So I use multiple services as a backup of sorts.
- itsTyrion 3y ago> fast DNS > recommends quad9 huh?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]