3 ms·
I tried Quad9 at our business for a while, about a year. I ended up moving to something else due to latency. I'm not sure if it was a routing issue or what but
by annoyingnoob 1mo ago
I tried Quad9 at our business for a while, about a year. I ended up moving to something else due to latency. I'm not sure if it was a routing issue or what but there were a lot of timeouts and slow responses. I have not had these issues with other providers.
- jordand 1mo agoI'd used NextDNS for a while but the service kept degrading with more timeouts regardless if you were on free/paid. Haven't had any issues with Quad9
- winstonwinston 1mo agoWhen I run a mix of CF and Quad9 resolvers, Quad9 was consistently slower in response times when measured. But it didn’t make any perceivable difference in real usage.
- esseph 1mo ago> But it didn’t make any perceivable difference in real usage. It can, it depends on the systems and user patterns. Example: if an end user is going to the same site over and over, those DNS responses are probably cached locally on the device, and may also be cached on any upstream resolvers. OTOH if you were somebody without a Facebook account that went to Facebook.com to view a post from a link, you could easily have 120 different DNS lookups for various resources on that domain that haven't been DNS or web resource cached yet.