CloudFlare D.N.S. Resolvers... (1.1.1.1 & 1.0.0.1)

Wed Sep 26 11:14:10 UTC 2018

I recommend that eyeball networks don't run any external recursive server for optimal CDN performance. Yes, some CDNs support other methods, but not all. If not all do, then the requirement remains. 

----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Michael Bullut" <main at kipsang.com> 
To: nanog at nanog.org 
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 2:52:07 AM 
Subject: CloudFlare D.N.S. Resolvers... (1.1.1.1 & 1.0.0.1) 

Greetings Team, 

Has anyone deployed the aforementioned in your individual networks? A quick test suggests it is quite fast compared with Google's D.N.S. resolvers: 

C:\Users\bullutm>ping 1.1.1.1 

Pinging 1.1.1.1 with 32 bytes of data: 
Reply from 1.1.1.1 : bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=61 
Reply from 1.1.1.1 : bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=61 
Reply from 1.1.1.1 : bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=61 
Reply from 1.1.1.1 : bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=61 

Ping statistics for 1.1.1.1 : 
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), 
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: 
Minimum = 3ms, Maximum = 8ms, Average = 4ms 

C:\Users\bullutm> 

------- 

C:\Users\bullutm>tracert 1.1.1.1 

Tracing route to one.one.one.one [1.1.1.1] 
over a maximum of 30 hops: 

1 4 ms 3 ms 4 ms 10.101.129.254 
2 6 ms 20 ms 7 ms 10.98.0.165 
3 7 ms 13 ms 15 ms 10.98.0.233 
4 7 ms 5 ms 4 ms one.one.one.one [1.1.1.1] 

Trace complete. 

C:\Users\bullutm> 

Warm regards, 

Michael Bullut. 

--- 

Cell: +254 723 393 114. 
Skype Name: Michael Bullut. 

Twitter: @Kipsang 

Blog: http://www.kipsang.com/ 
E-mail: main at kipsang.com 

--- 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20180926/23980430/attachment.html>