Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (1420 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse] optimizing resolv.conf
Felix Miata said the following on 01/01/2014 03:27 AM:
My web browsers often seem to spend a lot of time reporting "looking up host
<blah>". I'd like to see less of that in 2014, and spend less time watching
nothing happen in the browser's viewport. seems to make sense, but it
includes no discussion of a local nameserver, such as the one typically
enabled by default in an internet router, only using Google IPs. Anyone have
anything to add or dispute what it says?

Yes, lots!
Visit and read up on a few other items.

First, filtering out ads, either by this method or using an adblock plugin for Firefox, means fewer looks & delays and less screen real estate taken up by adverts. That also means faster rendering.

Second, by routing a whole pile of advert sites at the DNS level rather than just within the adblock level you are blocking them for all machines on your LAN and for all types of access. You may find this a better 'parental control' but it also means a while pile of malicious "Call home" services are blocked. And I don't mean just botnets. Read the 'cyber-News" of the last few months.

Yes this too takes maintenance.

Are those using routers better off using the one it includes? Better off

No. In my config is the LAST entry.
The first is for my local caching DNS server.

Read that again: *C*A*C*H*I*N*G*
That means it has instantaneous response from the cache rather than looking up yet again at Google.

The benefit of google, presumably, is that they are running a ****-ing huge caching server on a machine or cluster that is very fast and has a very fat pipe. Which is why I list them at all.

But not first!

Many people consider it unsociable to block adverts since they are what, ultimately, pays for the services. I've heard this same thing said about TV adverts. You may consider it even more unsociable to block google-analytics since that lookup takes time as well. That might amount to the height of 'Net unsociability!

Is there any convenient way to evaluate average response times from various

Well you could start by pinging them.
How fast they will resolve as DNS servers depends on the load being placed on them by other users. In general that's not something you have control over. Since, however, my #1 DNS server is the server under my desk that also handles email, I do know about its load. There's only me using it.

Are there logical reasons for avoiding Google's or other high visibility

Are there reasons why the servers provided by the ISP subscribed to shouldn't
be preferred?

Quite the converse. Assuming you have a good ISP who knows that they are doing, then their caching DNS server is just a scaled down version of Google's. But the point is that its closer!

Ping it and look at at the response times. Ping your ISP then ping google.

I get:

--- server ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 3999ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.236/0.261/0.294/0.030 ms

--- Router ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4006ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.733/2.003/2.551/0.341 ms

--- ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4004ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 33.696/34.659/35.935/0.794 ms

I think that makes a strong case for why *I* use a local DNS server.

Can anyone explain why the default timeout is 5s and not more or less? Is it
a holdover from times past when the internet was less busy, and often less
speedy via dialup or ISDN instead of broadband?

It only makes sense, as fr as I can tell, if you are using round robin and a few other details that arise out of performance testing of those particular servers from that particular location. It would make no sense for me.

If my local DNS server can't find the relevant record in its config or cache the it will hit my ISP. That's the first timeout that matters. My ISP has a big pipe and they probably end up checking with google eventually, so there's little point in timing out with them and going to google. My going to google would be really slow.

If I were to use the resolv.conf in the article then my system would become very very slow and unresponsive.

How long did the whining go on when KDE2 went on KDE3?

The only universal constant is change. If a species can not adapt it
goes extinct. That's the law of the universe, adapt or die.
-- Billie Walsh, May 18 2013
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
This Thread