5 ms·
4.2.2.1 and 4.2.2.2 have always worked great as DNS servers for me.
by whughes 18y ago
4.2.2.1 and 4.2.2.2 have always worked great as DNS servers for me.
- timf 18y agoThere's more, 4.2.2.[1-6], these are level3's I have no idea how they're actually load balanced but everyone always says 1 and 2 so I use the other ones.
- blasdel 18y ago1-3 are always golden for me, but 4-6 are hosted differently and are variable in their decency.
- blasdel 18y agoI've used this set of servers for years, they're the fastest I know of, period. I'll back that up with some data: DNS Server | Comcast in Seattle | The Planet Colo in Dallas Level3 4.2.2.X | 11ms ± 1.5ms 5hops | 1ms ± 0.2ms OpenDNS 208.67.222.222 | 35ms - 150ms 11hops | 24.9ms ± 0.1ms Comcast 68.87.68.162 | 90ms - 250ms 12hops | 23.4ms ± 0.1ms Hilariously, neither OpenDNS nor Comcast are so variable in ther sluggishness when accessed directly -- The Planet is peered directly with Level3, NTT (OpenDNS's host), and Comcast. On top of that, Comcast is marginally faster than OpenDNS outside their own shitty network! The relative slowness has nothing to do with the servers themselves.
- mikeyur 18y agoHoly crap. I just changed mine to 4.2.2.2 and 4.2.2.3 - my page load times seem like they have doubles. Not even joking. Thanks for the tip.