3 ms·

No, I do not keep any logs from domain name resolution from the DNS service I used from 7+ years ago. If you do, I commend you. I used the term "blocking" in a

No, I do not keep any logs from domain name resolution from the DNS service I used from 7+ years ago. If you do, I commend you. I used the term "blocking" in a loose sense. I have no idea if Cloudflare was failing to resolve certain domains because it is a shitty service, or if it was ordered to block those domain names by its government, or if it was actively not resolving domain names because it thought a good idea to be a sort of arbiter and gatekeeper. I suspect the last option, but it is just speculation. What I can affirm is that I had issues more than once with domain name resolution when I used 1.1.1.1. After it annoyed me enough I switched to Quad9, and it has been great ever since, which is why I recommend it as a user of their service.

akerl_ 7mo ago
I don’t keep DNS logs at all. But I also don’t show up 7 years later trash talking a company or product based on guesswork and fear.
- surgical_fire 7mo ago
  It's not based in "guesswork and fear". It is a first-person account of someone that used their service. A user review, if you will. There's this thing - when you offer a service to the public, the users of your service, can, will, and should review your service. So, yes, I am free to "trash talk" a service that was, frankly, terrible at its job in providing domain name resolution. That works as any other user review, a data point so other users may switch away from a bad provider to a better one. I imagine if someone goes to a restaurant and they their hot dish is served cold, if your response to the user review is a silly request for proof that the food was indeed served cold, and whining that their review is "trash talking based on fear and guesswork".
  - akerl_ 7mo ago
    If you said that they served you cold food because the US government made them do it, yea, I’d think you were nuts.
    - surgical_fire 7mo ago
      And that's not what I said? I offered some possibilities of why they did a shitty job in providing naming resolution. I even speculated what was the most likely one (not the one you mentioned). But it's okay, at this point I have very little optimism regarding your reading ability.
longislandguido 7mo ago
> I have no idea if Cloudflare was failing to resolve certain domains because it is a shitty service, or if it was ordered to block those domain names by its government, or if it was actively not resolving domain names because it thought a good idea to be a sort of arbiter and gatekeeper. I'm going to go with option D) whatever shitty site you were browsing to had a broken DNS or more likely DNSSEC configuration and Cloudflare was correct to not serve a corrupt response. 99% of the time, tales of "they're blocking my site! you guys are nazis!" always turn out to have a root cause of broken DNS configuration.
- surgical_fire 7mo ago
  > I'm going to go with option D) whatever shitty site you were browsing to had a broken DNS or more likely DNSSEC configuration and Cloudflare was correct to not serve a corrupt response. And once I switched DNS I could browse it normally. This does not align quite well with the scenario you propose. > "they're blocking my site! you guys are nazis!" I said no such thing. I said it was a shitty DNS because it failed at the thing I was trying to use it for.

akerl_ 7mo ago

I don’t keep DNS logs at all. But I also don’t show up 7 years later trash talking a company or product based on guesswork and fear.

surgical_fire 7mo ago
It's not based in "guesswork and fear". It is a first-person account of someone that used their service. A user review, if you will. There's this thing - when you offer a service to the public, the users of your service, can, will, and should review your service. So, yes, I am free to "trash talk" a service that was, frankly, terrible at its job in providing domain name resolution. That works as any other user review, a data point so other users may switch away from a bad provider to a better one. I imagine if someone goes to a restaurant and they their hot dish is served cold, if your response to the user review is a silly request for proof that the food was indeed served cold, and whining that their review is "trash talking based on fear and guesswork".
- akerl_ 7mo ago
  If you said that they served you cold food because the US government made them do it, yea, I’d think you were nuts.
  - surgical_fire 7mo ago
    And that's not what I said? I offered some possibilities of why they did a shitty job in providing naming resolution. I even speculated what was the most likely one (not the one you mentioned). But it's okay, at this point I have very little optimism regarding your reading ability.

longislandguido 7mo ago

> I have no idea if Cloudflare was failing to resolve certain domains because it is a shitty service, or if it was ordered to block those domain names by its government, or if it was actively not resolving domain names because it thought a good idea to be a sort of arbiter and gatekeeper. I'm going to go with option D) whatever shitty site you were browsing to had a broken DNS or more likely DNSSEC configuration and Cloudflare was correct to not serve a corrupt response. 99% of the time, tales of "they're blocking my site! you guys are nazis!" always turn out to have a root cause of broken DNS configuration.

surgical_fire 7mo ago
> I'm going to go with option D) whatever shitty site you were browsing to had a broken DNS or more likely DNSSEC configuration and Cloudflare was correct to not serve a corrupt response. And once I switched DNS I could browse it normally. This does not align quite well with the scenario you propose. > "they're blocking my site! you guys are nazis!" I said no such thing. I said it was a shitty DNS because it failed at the thing I was trying to use it for.