Slashdot Mirror


How Does the New Google DNS Perform? (and Why?)

Tarinth writes "Google just announced its new Google DNS platform. Many have viewed this as a move to increase ad revenue, or maybe capture more data. This article explores those questions, as well as the actual benchmarking results for Google DNS — showing that it is faster than many, but not nearly as fast as many others." We also recently discussed security implications of the Google Public DNS.

10 of 275 comments (clear)

  1. Pointless hype by suso · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Its funny how the Google hype is driving so much talk about something like DNS, a service which probably 95% of non-tech people don't know exists. Most people
    wouldn't care about DNS normally, but since its Google it must be something to get excited about. I doubt really that any significant number of people will
    switch to using 8.8.8.8, but I worry that if they do, one of the the original goals for DNS will be lost. That its distributed.

    Just ask yourself one question, if you don't trust your internet provider enough to do DNS correctly, should you trust them at all?

    1. Re:Pointless hype by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just ask yourself one question, if you don't trust your internet provider enough to do DNS correctly, should you trust them at all?

      You trust your ISP? I sure don't. Perhaps I am asking for abuse, but I trust Google far more. On the other hand, I trust my hosting provider to provide sufficient DNS; but if I were hosting my application on a cloud somewhere, I'd want some cloud-based DNS; if I were hosting my application with Google, then Google would be the logical host for my name service. I'd probably want to use them as my registrar as well. :p

      Google has the best uptime and the most distributed architecture of any single computer system, unless you consider the internet to be a single entity; it has slightly better reach overall.

      I doubt really that any significant number of people will
      switch to using 8.8.8.8, but I worry that if they do, one of the the original goals for DNS will be lost. That its distributed.

      Google is distributed. Is there any reason using one IP is unworkable?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Pointless hype by jhoegl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I got money on the fact that this DNS server will be a part of their Android and Chrome OS services. You know, a default setting.

    3. Re:Pointless hype by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Fair enough -- you don't trust your ISP.

      How does using google's DNS help you? You really think your ISP isn't logging your DNS traffic regardless of if you're using their DNS servers or not? A simple tcpdump udp port 53 on a passive tap is enough for them to collect your DNS traffic no matter what you do unless you use TOR or a vpn.

      So, now google *and* your ISP have logs of what you've been looking up. How are you better off?

      Oh -- and if you really don't trust your ISP, how are you to be sure that they aren't redirecting your port 53 traffic to their DNS servers *anyway*? Comcast -- I'm looking at you... Why is it that 5% of responses that *should* be an NXDOMAIN from a root server instead are an A record to some site that happens to be running a web server?

    4. Re:Pointless hype by sexconker · · Score: 5, Funny

      Google has the best uptime and the most distributed architecture of any single computer system, unless you consider the internet to be a single entity; it has slightly better reach overall.

      No it fucking doesn't you fucking moron.

      Oh this is slashdot. I meant "Citation needed.".

    5. Re:Pointless hype by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      If your ISP is like mine, they break basic DNS functionality. Instead of a correct could not find error, they serve up a page of badvertising. If you opt out of that, they serve up a page that says that it could not find, not returning the real error. If you have your iPhone connected to your home wifi, and you attempt to use the google app on your phone, it breaks the search results page...

      ALL of these annoyances are fixed with gDNS.

    6. Re:Pointless hype by mzs · · Score: 5, Informative

      Google is using anycast for their DNS servers. There are not just two machines at 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 as the sole DNS servers. You get a relatively close-by server. This is a tried and true technique for DNS. In fact there is a technical feature about the google approach that is neat. It is likely that google is using many of the same servers it is for search for the DNS servers as well. They are running the caching DNS at each facility, such that if one server at the facility gets a record, then any other DNS server at that facility uses that response. That is one cool way to limit the delays for someone else making a DNS request. I've not seen that mentioned much before, and that is neat. I wish slashdot comments about stories that are trying to be technical would have technical comments on them near the beginning, instead of rehashing of all this privacy stuff, for a third or fourth story.

      Another approach that was mentioned a lot before is that after the DNS server provides a response, the server checks to see if time is running-out regarding the TTL. If it is and has not expired yet, it asks again and pretends that the TTL counter has begun again. This again is trying to limit a DNS delay for some poor schmuck.

      Another technical detail I have not seen mentioned much is that google DNS servers are returning largely authoritive answers only, often in cases where other DNS servers do not. For example, look-up a private IPv4 such as 192.168.1.1 with google's servers and some others. Others typically return non-authoritive responses, say to RFC1918.private.net. There is a lot of subtly misconfigured software-out there, hopefully this will bring it to the fore front about dealing with non-authoritive answers more carefully.

      As to regarding the performance of google DNS, from a few locations for me, seems very fast. Is faster (much) than AT&T, bit slower than comcast, bit slower than work, comparison with OpenDNS is in the noise. What is more important is that they treat all records correctly, so for example kx509 _kca._udp.REALM style SRV records are handled unlike the DNS servers from some ISPs which seem to think that DNS is only for A records.

      Another interesting feature is that google DNS is playing tricks with case in DNS queries and replies as yet another stop-gap-measure against DNS cache poisoning attacks. That's clever, I believe it was proposed before, but bind folks presented some issues and left it at that.

  2. Google is average by jhoegl · · Score: 5, Funny

    This just in, Google is average at something they did. Google's parents are very upset and will not be posting this on their refrigerator. In other news, detractors of Google throw party.

  3. My own more detailed analysis by bramp · · Score: 5, Informative

    I ran my own set of experiments benchmarking both Google DNS and OpenDNS as well as two UK ISPs. I showed more detailed results, and infer some information about how these systems are run. http://bramp.net/blog/google-dns-benchmarked

  4. Most ISP's DNS servers are broken. by KingSkippus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just ask yourself one question, if you don't trust your internet provider enough to do DNS correctly, should you trust them at all?

    My ISP's nameservers are broken. Whenever I try to resolve a name that doesn't exist, instead of the DNS server telling me it doesn't exist, it returns the address of one of my ISP's web servers, which presents me with an ad-laden search page for whatever name I typed in. This is clearly not what the DNS spec says it is supposed to do.

    While this might not sound like such a big deal, for developers it's a pain in the butt. For one thing, if I want to test to see if, for example, a name I have registered has propagated, I can't just do an nslookup to see if I get a response; I have to actually verify that the address that is returned (since all lookups will resolve to something) is the actual correct address instead of my ISP's web server. Also, on the client side, when my applications communicate via the web, they have to not only verify that an address resolved, but actually verify with the back-end application that it is what it's supposed to be instead of an ISP's search page. Just since I changed my DNS servers last week, I've already saved at least a minute or two I shouldn't have had to spend in the first place.

    Plus, even if all of that still doesn't convince you that Google is actually doing something helpful, there's the simple fact that my ISP's servers actually had on average an hour or so down time every couple of months. It wasn't scheduled or anything (that I know of, anyway), I would just all of a sudden not be able to resolve any addresses. If I called technical support, the goobs there would insist on me plugging my computer directly into their modem, and when it still wouldn't work, they'd schedule a time a few days out for a technician to come out to my house. They simply wouldn't acknowledge that the problem was on their end, not mine, and they didn't understand simple concepts like nslookups, tracerts, etc. I'd invariably just give up, tell them not to send anyone, and wait without Internet access for their network people to figure it out after a lot more people called in.

    I started using OpenDNS a long time ago because of all of the problems with my ISP's DNS servers, even though they also redirect queries that aren't found to their search page. If I wanted other features OpenDNS offers like parental controls and such, I'd probably stay with them. As it is, though, consider me another happy consumer of another helpful Google service. As the informal tech support guy for most of my family and friends, I'll be switching as many of them over as I can too, so I can avoid just a few more "Hey, I can't get to the Internet" calls.