Google Public DNS vs. OpenDNS.org

[schultzter]

Good afternoon...

I currently use OpenDNS.org so I'm wondering how Google's offering
compares? And how it compares to the DNS servers from my ISP? I know
my ISP has (in the past) been less then neutral with their DNS so I'm
happy to see public DNS servers like OpenDNS.org and Google being made
available.

But I'm concerned that a basic service like DNS could suffer the ill-
effects of a competitive war.

I almost think it would have better if Google sponsored OpenDNS.org
rather than come-up with a competing product.

[msingletary]

Right now the difference is that Google Public DNS does not use any
sort of redirection or display any ads. If a host (domain name, web
address, etc...) doesn't resolve, it will just fail. With OpenDNS,
they hijack these failures and redirect you to a search page that
displays ads and makes them money.

So far, Google Public DNS appears to be more concerned about speed,
security, and unobtrusiveness. I'm sure they'll make their money with
the data they collect from our queries instead of hijacking,
redirecting, and then making money off of them directly like OpenDNS
does.

From a user perspective, there's probably not any noticeable
difference between the two services other than a lack of an ad-laden
search page that comes up on OpenDNS if you miss-type a URL or if your
DNS lookup fails for some reason in your browser.

[pat]

There is more to OpenDNS than ads. OpenDNS also enables content
filtering. I have a couple of young children and keeping them clear
of some "bad" sites has been a very useful tool. While Google is
interesting; the filtering of DNS is a useful tool as well. And
please don't tell me just network nanny, etc. We have all types of
devices, iPod Touch, Xbox, mac, windows, etc. that all need
filtering. DNS is the easy way to do this everywhere.

Pat

[EricIsDeliriou5]

I also use OpenDNS for content filtering and traffic monitoring for my
entire family. It has been the best solution to allow me to control
access for all of the devices that my family uses to connect to the
Internet. While Google's DNS is interesting, I personally will not
move to Google until I can control filtering and have monitoring.

[Joshua]

Same here EriclsDeliriou5 - until they have content filtering I will
not be making the switch.

[brunes]

If you're relying on DNS to do content filtering I hope your kids are
not odler than 5 or 6... otherwise they likely already know how to get
around it and you just are not aware.

You can't do content filtering with DNS, it doesn't even make sense.
All you can do is trivial masking.

[Runaway1956]

OpenDNS has been good to me. The ISP's in my area of Backwoods,
Nowhere have really bad DNS servers. OpenDNS gave faster results,
consistently. But, as always, I test whatever Google comes up with.
So far, today, I've noticed a decent improvement. Lag is cut down
considerably. I like, so I'll probably stay with GoogleDNS.

[brunes]

On Dec 3, 3:20 pm, msingletary <michael.singlet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From a user perspective, there's probably not any noticeable
> difference between the two services other than a lack of an ad-laden
> search page that comes up on OpenDNS if you miss-type a URL or if your
> DNS lookup fails for some reason in your browser.
>

There is actually a big difference - NX based search roting like
OpenDNS and other ISPs use breaks things like Firefox and Chrome's
awesome bar, which rely on a proper NX domain coming back to know to
send you to a Google search.

This is probably the whole reason Google decided to do this - these
services were cutting into their ad revenue.

[hawks5999]

Did OpenDns kick your dog or something? Why all the angst toward a
company that until this point has had no competitor and has offered an
incredible service at no cost to the user (until their recent business/
premium services). You make oDNS sound like it's filled with "punch
the monkey" ads when all they do is display adsense text ads relevant
to your misspelled or non-existent domain. And as others have pointed
out here, their filtering is incredible for home/small office/school/
library use cases that don't have budget to pay Websense, barracuda
and the like. To infer that oDNS is slow, unsafe or obtrusive is off
base. Cut oDNS a break.

[Brian Hanifin]

I am surprised they don't block malware sites? I would expect their
DNS service to display "This site may harm your computer" warning
pages, like their search results do? If they did that, I would give
this service a try. Right now I have OpenDNS setup to block Adware,
Parked Domains, and Phishing sites.

P.S. Here is OpenDNS's take on competition from Google:

http://blog.opendns.com/2009/12/03/opendns-google-dns/

[MikhailT]

There's a difference between an ISP doing content filtering without
your intervention and the ISP giving you the option to do content
filtering at DNS level with the former being the principles of the
Internet (or Network Neutrality). Content filtering unfortunately is
required for many people to protect them from malware sites or even
DDoS attacks.

On Dec 3, 3:10 pm, Avery <ave...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think Google will ever be doing content filtering at the DNS
> level. That sort of thing is against the principles of the Internet.