OpenDNS vs. Earthlink

I’d heard about OpenDNS being significantly faster than stock DNS servers, mostly because of more aggressive caching. I followed their instructions for configuring the service and ran a few queries with dig to see how it performed against my stock Earthlink DNS servers, the venerable itchy and scratchy.

Results after the cut.

Results

Here are two queries using Earthlink servers:

elli:~ phil$ time dig facebook.com && time dig apple.com

; <<>> DiG 9.3.4 <<>> facebook.com
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 50925
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 4

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;facebook.com.                  IN      A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
facebook.com.           1700    IN      A       69.63.176.140
facebook.com.           1700    IN      A       69.63.178.11

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
facebook.com.           12269   IN      NS      dns05.sf2p.tfbnw.net.
facebook.com.           12269   IN      NS      dns04.sf2p.tfbnw.net.
facebook.com.           12269   IN      NS      ns1.facebook.com.
facebook.com.           12269   IN      NS      ns2.facebook.com.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
ns2.facebook.com.       3207    IN      A       204.74.67.132
dns05.sf2p.tfbnw.net.   131959  IN      A       69.63.176.9
dns04.sf2p.tfbnw.net.   131577  IN      A       69.63.176.8
ns1.facebook.com.       3207    IN      A       204.74.66.132

;; Query time: 32 msec
;; SERVER: 207.69.188.185#53(207.69.188.185)
;; WHEN: Wed Jul 23 11:23:35 2008
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 216

; <<>> DiG 9.3.4 <<>> apple.com
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 48776
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 6, ADDITIONAL: 5

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;apple.com.                     IN      A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
apple.com.              124     IN      A       17.112.152.57
apple.com.              124     IN      A       17.149.160.49

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
apple.com.              92770   IN      NS      nserver2.apple.com.
apple.com.              92770   IN      NS      nserver.asia.apple.com.
apple.com.              92770   IN      NS      nserver.apple.com.
apple.com.              92770   IN      NS      nserver4.apple.com.
apple.com.              92770   IN      NS      nserver.euro.apple.com.
apple.com.              92770   IN      NS      nserver3.apple.com.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
nserver.asia.apple.com. 85265   IN      A       17.82.254.3
nserver.euro.apple.com. 85934   IN      A       17.72.133.64
nserver2.apple.com.     172562  IN      A       17.254.0.59
nserver3.apple.com.     431998  IN      A       17.112.144.50
nserver4.apple.com.     172562  IN      A       17.112.144.59

;;; Query time: 32 msec
;; SERVER: 207.69.188.185#53(207.69.188.185)
;; WHEN: Wed Jul 23 11:23:35 2008
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 284

And with OpenDNS:

elli:~ phil$ time dig facebook.com && time dig apple.com    

; <<>> DiG 9.3.4 <<>> facebook.com
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 3356
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;facebook.com.                  IN      A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
facebook.com.           2606    IN      A       69.63.176.140
facebook.com.           2606    IN      A       69.63.178.11

;; Query time: 48 msec
;; SERVER: 208.67.222.222#53(208.67.222.222)
;; WHEN: Wed Jul 23 11:22:12 2008
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 62

; <<>> DiG 9.3.4 <<>> apple.com
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 36024
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;apple.com.                     IN      A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
apple.com.              2738    IN      A       17.149.160.49
apple.com.              2738    IN      A       17.112.152.57

;; Query time: 46 msec
;; SERVER: 208.67.222.222#53(208.67.222.222)
;; WHEN: Wed Jul 23 11:22:13 2008
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 59

Analysis

It may be that OpenDNS provides the faster response on subsequent requests, which would make sense if caching is their primary means of a boost. lookupd caches aggressively locally anyway, though, so that’s a moot point.

After learning about Earthlink’s search and ad-free DNS servers, I’m sold on what I already have.

Comments are closed.