Results 1 to 22 of 22
-
04-21-2010, 10:42 PM #1WHT Addict
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
- Toronto / New York
- Posts
- 166
Google DNS for Forward Lookups from server?
The colo facility I am considering doesn't operate DNS servers for forward lookups. I guess this is common..? Anyway they are suggesting that I use Google DNS for forward DNS lookups from my server.
Is that a good suggestion? Not sure what to think, but it seems harmless though. Thanks.
-
04-21-2010, 11:08 PM #2Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Location
- /bin/sh
- Posts
- 815
Not too common, but not uncommon either. use 8.8.8.8, 8.8.4.4, 4.2.2.1, 4.2.2.2, opendns resolvers etc etc, i'm sure others will have more suggestions.
Google also have phone support
http://code.google.com/speed/public-dns/docs/using.html
-
04-22-2010, 02:39 PM #3Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- Location
- /dev/null
- Posts
- 2,132
It's easier to recommend it when you are nearby to a Google peering exchange, and you don't have the time or resources to keep resolver servers running. Or simply don't want to take the blame when the resolver goes down. Sometimes it's faster than using the uplink servers (i.e., in my case, the Google resolvers are local in Miami via peering, the carrier servers are one in NY and one in LAX). The IPs for Google and Level3 servers are easier to remember also...
-
04-22-2010, 03:04 PM #4WHT Addict
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
- Toronto / New York
- Posts
- 166
-
04-22-2010, 03:14 PM #5Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- Location
- /dev/null
- Posts
- 2,132
ping 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 and see how many milliseconds it takes to reply.
-
04-22-2010, 03:18 PM #6WHT Addict
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
- Toronto / New York
- Posts
- 166
About 25ms to the Google DNS...
The 4.2.2.1 and 4.2.2.2 ones ping at 17ms - who owns those?
Is this going to be too slow, or is that okay?
-
04-22-2010, 03:36 PM #7Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- Location
- /dev/null
- Posts
- 2,132
4.0.0.0/8 is owned by Level3.
They were old GTE public DNS servers.
The speed of light in fiber is 200 x 10^6 m/s (200k km/s). That means the latency of an optical signal traveling in a fiber-optic cable is 5 microsec per kilometer. Plus the overhead for signaling, encapsulation and hardware speeds on each end.
At those ranges, they are nowhere close to your location, but, if you don't have local public resolvers, the 4.2.2.12 resolvers would be better...
-
04-22-2010, 03:41 PM #8WHT Addict
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
- Toronto / New York
- Posts
- 166
Ok thanks. Last question, kinda noobish, but what do these resolvers actually impact on the server? Obviously I'm not using my server for web browsing websites, so I would imagine this will impact some applications on the servers ability to resolve DNS queries. It's not a "huge" deal, am I right? Or way off?
-
04-22-2010, 04:04 PM #9Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- Location
- /dev/null
- Posts
- 2,132
If your server is a mail server, it wont be able to deliver emails. It wont be able to use its auto-update functions (being your package manager in *nix or Windows Update on windows). It wont be able to resolve reverse DNS queries for people who connect at it (if you set some kind of filter on the webserver based on the hostname of the machine that is connecting to you).
-
04-22-2010, 04:28 PM #10Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Posts
- 71
You could run your own DNS server and make sure it's only accessible to you since it's doing open recursion. I haven't had much trouble with 4.2.2.2 personally.
ActiveHost Corporation - Hyper-V, New York Co-location, VPS, Dedicated & Shared Hosting
Fully Supporting: Windows 2008, ASP.NET 3.5, SQL 2008, Silverlight 3
14 Years in Business with our own multi-million dollar data center
www.activehost.comsales@activehost.com1-888-500-6799
-
04-23-2010, 02:39 AM #11WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Feb 2010
- Location
- Atlanta, GA
- Posts
- 173
Open DNS is a good one too...
208.67.222.222
208.67.220.220
-
04-25-2010, 10:27 AM #12Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
- London, United Kingdom
- Posts
- 390
Google's DNS servers are multicast, so they should always give you good latency. I've had no problem using them ever.
The guy above is right about reverse DNS though, all providers should provide this.
-
04-27-2010, 02:52 AM #13Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Location
- Riverside, CA
- Posts
- 35
Google works great for me
-
04-27-2010, 08:15 AM #14Newbie
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Location
- Rotterdam,The Netherlands
- Posts
- 9
ehm, you have your own server? Install DNS server software on it (like Bind) and use your localhost 127.0.0.1 as resolver!
-
04-27-2010, 08:57 AM #15WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Posts
- 121
-
04-27-2010, 09:53 AM #16Newbie
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Location
- Rotterdam,The Netherlands
- Posts
- 9
-
04-27-2010, 09:56 AM #17WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Posts
- 121
-
04-27-2010, 04:56 PM #18Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Posts
- 402
I would never trust OpenDNS with my server DNS. If you need something to use, try the previously mentioned Level3 servers.
OpenDNS hijacks Google among other weird things. It's not meant to be used in the server environment.█ iCall Carrier Services - Carrier-grade VoIP services from a licensed CLEC - http://carriers.icall.com
█ Domestic termination and origination, toll-free origination, A-Z International termination, dedicated servers, and colocation in our wholly-owned datacenter
█ Real-time ordering via our control panel or XML-based API with over 20,000 numbers in stock
-
04-28-2010, 10:04 AM #19Newbie
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Posts
- 10
Google Dns apparently has more servers than OpenDns and they both use anycast (not multicast). On the other hand Google Dns is just basic dns caching while OpenDns offers some other cool features.
However all dns caching services such as these suffer from one major drawback: they ruin dns balancing. In other words, if you visit a site that does load balancing you will probably not get to the server that is nearest to you.
-
04-28-2010, 02:25 PM #20Web Hosting Evangelist
- Join Date
- Apr 2003
- Posts
- 454
-
04-28-2010, 02:50 PM #21Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Posts
- 371
Over the last several weeks we have had issues with 4.2.2.2 and 4.2.2.1. As soon as we switched to 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 the issues went away. Since it was over several weeks we thought it had something to do with the servers or traffic routing.
My suggestion would be to use Google’s solution.
-
04-28-2010, 02:58 PM #22WHT Addict
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
- Toronto / New York
- Posts
- 166
Similar Threads
-
need test dns lookups from around the world
By plumsauce in forum Hosting Security and TechnologyReplies: 6Last Post: 07-09-2008, 06:03 PM -
Slow YUM and DNS lookups?
By FrozenWire in forum Hosting Security and TechnologyReplies: 7Last Post: 02-25-2008, 10:14 PM -
slow dns lookups
By aww in forum Hosting Security and TechnologyReplies: 17Last Post: 09-23-2007, 03:25 AM -
DNS Lookups Failing Suddenly - Please Help
By Mitsurugi in forum Hosting Security and TechnologyReplies: 4Last Post: 12-14-2005, 11:53 AM -
DNS lookups
By gagsplus in forum Dedicated ServerReplies: 7Last Post: 04-13-2002, 07:14 PM