What DNS do you use with your Asus/Merlin

[anotherengineer]

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but just wondering if everyone still jumps on the old OpenDNS bandwagon, or has that ship sailed and everyone sticks with their default ISP DNS?

I am currently using default ISP DNS currently, but used to use OpenDNS, and have also used GoogleDNS.

Any advantages of a non ISP DNS?

 

[Marc66]

I've been using OpenDNS for about a year, mainly for its anti-malware feature and to block specific domains.

Performance is good, so I'm sticking with it.


Sent using Tapatalk

 

[RMerlin]

I've always advised people to stick to the ISP's DNS, unless they needed either the OpenDNS filtering capabilities, or something was very wrong with their ISP's.

I found this very interesting article showing the concrete performance impact that comes from using one of those public nameservers when it comes to CDN performance:

http://www.cdnplanet.com/blog/google-dns-opendns-and-cdn-performance/

 

[Zirescu]

Using Dnscrpyt with cryptostorm.is servers and haven't had any issues. Most of my traffic goes over VPN through TorGuard networks. Depends on if you like your privacy or not

 

[RMerlin]

Using Dnscrpyt with cryptostorm.is servers and haven't had any issues. Most of my traffic goes over VPN through TorGuard networks. Depends on if you like your privacy or not

Personally, I'm more interested in my video/audio streaming performance than in trying to hide my DNS queries from my ISP.

To each his own priorities, nothing wrong with either mentalities IMHO.

 

[Klueless]

I've always advised people to stick to the ISP's DNS, unless they needed either the OpenDNS filtering capabilities, or something was very wrong with their ISP's.

For what little it's worth ... I agree.

My local ISP DNS resolver is faster (something to do with the speed of light : -) I did use Google for awhile when my local ISP was having trouble and I'm thinking of using the G-rated version of OpenDNS for work and home (to reduce the sundry risks that come with going to uh naughty websites).

 

[Zirescu]

Personally, I'm more interested in my video/audio streaming performance than in trying to hide my DNS queries from my ISP.

To each his own priorities, nothing wrong with either mentalities IMHO.

I haven't had any issues with streaming performance over the VPN connection (actually improved issues I was having with the Apple TV). I'm able to get the download and upload speeds that I pay for since moving to the 87u, it was a bit taxing for the N66U.

 

[RMerlin]

I haven't had any issues with streaming performance over the VPN connection (actually improved issues I was having with the Apple TV). I'm able to get the download and upload speeds that I pay for since moving to the 87u, it was a bit taxing for the N66U.

Everyone's result will obviously be different.

Check the third part of the article I linked. It's interesting seeing how the impact of not going through your ISP's DNS will vary greatly between countries. While the average tendency was to get lower performance when using OpenDNS/Google DNS, there were a few specific cases where performance actually improved.

EDIT: added link to third part, which is the most interesting part IMHO.

 

[RMerlin]

It was also interesting learning in this edns-client-subnet extension that would help resolve the CDN-specific issues of using a global DNS - hadn't heard about that before.

 

[Nullity]

Google is fastest for me and the server is ~90 miles away, unlike my ISP's server which is hundreds of miles away in a different state.

Although the ping is only ~15ms better with Google, the actual query response time is much faster, often hundreds of milliseconds faster when the DNS server resolves an un-cached hostname.

 

[CooCooCaChoo]

Well you could configure the router to use all three public dns servers (Google, OpenDNS and your ISP) with the following option in dnsmasq:

all-servers

dnsmasq will query all three and use the first response it gets back. But this is not considered good practice. This way if one server is slow and another is faster, you will always get the fastest response time.

 

[Nullity]

...

dnsmasq will query all three and use the first response it gets back. But this is not considered good practice. This way if one server is slow and another is faster, you will always get the fastest response time.

Why?

 

[CooCooCaChoo]

Why?

Because the router would send out extra queries that it technically did not need to, placing load on those servers that got queried--what I read, not what I advocate. Plus different dns servers are configured differently. One dns server might give you an address to a site, while another blocks it based on some configuration by its operator.

Personally, I use the all-servers myself (Google, OpenDNS, and Comcast, my ISP).

 

[Nullity]

Because the router would send out extra queries that it technically did not need to, placing load on those servers that got queried--what I read, not what I advocate. Plus different dns servers are configured differently. One dns server might give you an address to a site, while another blocks it based on some configuration by its operator.

Personally, I use the all-servers myself (Google, OpenDNS, and Comcast, my ISP).

Makes sense. I use the parallel query myself, but Google constantly won every test I ran so now I just use Google's primary & secondary.

I never hesitate to throw packets at Google's infrastructure. They can handle it...

 

[Skoven]

Using DNSCrypt.eu server - supports DNSSEC and DNSCrypt, and is located in my country.
Before that, i used googles DNS.
Perhaps you should try Namebech.

 

[jack901]

sheildsup guy has a way faster dnsbench test
https://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm

 

[Skoven]

Any advantages of a non ISP DNS?

Yes - lack of censoring.
In my country most ISP's block certain sites by DNS.

 

[Skoven]

sheildsup guy has a way faster dnsbench test
https://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm

Cool - will check that out. Namebench takes forever.

 

[sfx2000]

I've always advised people to stick to the ISP's DNS, unless they needed either the OpenDNS filtering capabilities, or something was very wrong with their ISP's.

I found this very interesting article showing the concrete performance impact that comes from using one of those public nameservers when it comes to CDN performance:

With CDN's - many content providers to local endpoints within the carrier's network, so DNS queries by the local ISP will resolve to them for the best experience.

OpenDNS, Google Public DNS, and others - might interfere, even then I'll say that Google's public DNS is rather clever about this.

 

[scyto]

I stick with ISP DNS mostly and when i want to watch something in UK on iplayer i use smartdnsporxy.com