Which DNS service do you use

[cruelsister]

Every month or so I compare what I consider the better anti-malware site DNS services, namely Comodo, Norton and Clearcloud. I check using the most convenient method- via the links on Malware Domain List (normally about 20 links for each). I've been doing this for the past 5 months and have been quite surprised that the effectiveness of all three seems to have gone downhill. Clearcloud was initially very good when I began my testing, but has since deteriorated to the level of Comodo (which has always been in last place- too bad since their CIS is most excellent). Norton lately has caught the most links but still detects less than 50%.

I know I shouldn't complain as all are free to use, but I expected more from especially Norton. You would think that a multi-billion dollar Security company would take their DNS service a little more seriously. If I can easily get Malware site links, hey should be able to easily block them.

[shought]

My ISP DNS is 282% faster than OpenDNS, but does that really mean anything? What are the practical implications of this number?

Let me show you.

Assume I am a web server and I make 5000 unique DNS queries per day.

5000 x 23ms = 115 seconds. Using ISP DNS.

5000 x 65ms = 325 seconds. Using OpenDNS.

I saved 210 seconds = 3.5 mins daily if I make 5000 unique dns queries per day.

My dns cache in Windows 7 currently has 125 entries, which means my top 125 dns queries are cached by Windows so if we count a generous 5 unique dns requests per website then my most visited 25 sites per day are cached from the first time I visit them and they remain cached until they expire. So after the first query, subsequent queries are replied to in 0ms.

By the way, assuming 5000 unique dns queries per day on a personal computer is an exaggeration. Even with torrents running it probably does not reach that amount. 5000 queries per day is easy but 5000 unique queries per day is highly improbable.

I'm not even going to do the maths for this but on a really good day I probably save 30 seconds by using my ISP DNS as opposed to OpenDNS. The question is whether those 30 seconds matter to me more than the advanced features, Botnet and Phishing scam protection, redundancy and resilience of OpenDNS?

In the past I have had the issue of site not resolving because they changed their hosting server and IP address and my ISP had not yet updated their cache so all I got was the old dysfunctional site whereas when I used OpenDNS I got through to the new website immediately. Which one really increased my online productivity and actually saved me time? The site that was giving me those problems at the time was EZTV, I switched to OpenDNS and never looked back. Oh and you don't need to use any program to send your IP address to OpenDNS, you can just use the dns servers straight off, the sending IP part is only if you care to record statistics.

Something to think about.

Very good argument.

However, I wasn't using most of the advanced services of OpenDNS and I didn't like the fact that they redirected non-existent domains to their own 'ad service' (not sure if they still do that).

[DKT27]

They still do that. But that's the only negative point of OpenDNS.

Today morning I was testing a new OS. It's LAN settings were set to DHCP and auto DNS. I was confused I wasn't able to surf the internet. I did diag from my router and found my DNS was failing. I manually entered the DNS of my ISP. And surfed for a hour. My ISP's DNS is the biggest crap ever been. It's failed about 50% times. Whenever it replied, it was the fastest then them all. But no consistency or protection.

Lets not forget, if someone (Feds for example) wants to track you, having a ISP's DNS will make their one step easier.

- (part of quote from) Box

[MrCyberNeo]

Using no-ip with there own tool DUC 3.04

[Marik]

My ISPs. Much faster than everything else.

same here....fast...blazing :uhoh:

[T0nyB]

For an hour now, OpenDNS and lovin' it, the speeed boost is significant. Never going back! :)