AutoHotkey Community

http://www.opendns.com/

This is a free dns service i've used for years which is usually alot better and faster than company default dns's. You can always change it back if it isnt.



from what i understand. A dns is basically a database that contains the ip's of websites

for example. tell a computer to connect to youtube.com without a dns and it wont be able to. the dns will convert youtube.com into something like (made up on the spot) '168.23.18.123' which is the ip of youtubes servers

if you connected to youtube, you will need multiple of these conversions to give you the real locations of the things you want to load (images, adverts, etc)

so it wont make your internet faster, but it will convert faster and therefore allowing you to start loading before you previously could.

I keep wondering why soo many people like & keep recommending OpenDNS. Sure, it sounds "good"...like "Open Source DNS"? But it is NOT GOOD.

I tried them years ago, noticed the "Guide" (an ad-riddled page on "typo'd URLs"), then immediately switched back. I DO NOT support DNS hijacking, if I wanna ping dsfasdsdfs.com I want it to FAIL, not send a ping reply, as if that domain exists. I also, do not want invalid domains to send me to their "Guide" to "help" me find what I was looking for. I will use Google, once I notice a domain don't exist. I don't need their ad-ridden Guide to "help" me...but it's more than just their ads, it's the fact that EVERY DNS request succeeds, even for domains that don't exist...that's just WRONG.

Yes, I know that if I create an account, I can check a box to turn this crap off, but I don't want an account & they should not do this anyway, let alone by default. I could almost be OK with it, if I could opt-out without an account, for example have an alternate OpenDNS-without-Guide IPs to input instead of the main IPs.

I use 4.2.2.1 & 4.2.2.2...easier to remember...&...non-existent domains FAIL, like they should.

x79animal: I sincerely hope you don't take this the wrong way. I support your choice to use them, if you want to. I just wanted you & others to know why I think they are bad. BTW, do you like their Guide?...or did you not know about it?

google's dns addresses are 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4
have been using since long.

_________________
If i've seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants

my site | ~shajul | WYSIWYG BBCode Editor

i've heard similar stories about OpenDNS and their ads.

i was unaware that google offered DNS until this thread. its funny that as soon as i saw that google offered the same thing, my mind immediately would prefer to use google. have i gone wacky?

heres a link for other public dns servers:

http://www.tech-faq.com/public-dns-servers.html

OpenDNS is good. I haven't tried Google but I imagine that it is very reliable. Sometimes your ISP's DNS servers are the fastest and most reliable. So... which should you use? Raw and consistent speed (response) is one way to help you decide.

GRC's DNS Benchmark is an excellent tool for measuring the response of a large group of DNS servers. Most public DNS servers (OpenDNS, Google, Level 3, etc.) are already included. You'll want to add your ISP's DNS addresses if they are not included already.

http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm

I turned it off with an account. It doesnt bother me either way though




Thanks for linking this, i ran the benchmark and got neustar in 1st, and open dns in second. With google far behind near the bottom...

So i checked out neustar and you apparently have to pay for it. So it seems opendns is still the best option for me.

This is usually true if you subscribe to one of big players (AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, etc.) but who knows what you'll get if you subscribe to one of the thousands of Mom-And-Pop vendors. GRC's DNS Benchmark gives a pretty good what's what of all available options.

For me, the default name server (Verizon for me) appears to be the fastest and most reliable. I use it for primary resolution. I use Level 3 as secondary and OpenDNS as tertiary.