". . . The DNS benchmark is old and, in my opinion, the world has changed since it was written. To me, the most important aspect of a DNS provider is not speed, but rather ad blocking and/or tracker blocking . . ."
What a great idea for
DNSBench II . . . what kinds of
blocking a DNS service provides, and perhaps an inexhaustible list of test domains to pump through such a test, like all XXX sites, all sites that log activity, all sites that inject off-site code - how many of them are there, is there a daily list findable somewhere, or are such lists proprietary, mined daily, changing daily, and closely-held within each competitive DNS-filtering marketing organization,
not available to DNSBench?
Perhaps using crowd-sourced lists of bad actors, like the many subscription lists from
PeerBlock -
https://www.google.com/search?q=peerblock - and other
BlockLists -
https://github.com/hagezi/dns-blocklists - DNSBench could first download them all, load them all up into a database, then send queries to each blocked item, and then report if the DNS server delivered a round trip or not.
What are we thinking, a few hundred thousand items to download and test? A million? More?
Then there's
IPv6, right?
The subject line of this thread:
Why are NextDNS servers not defined in the GRC DNS Benchmark Resolver List?
Still unanswered:
What NextDNS addresses did you use? <- Important information!
Anyway, in the meantime, some folks are still on
DSL or slower, oh my, so not only
speed, but
reliability, as well as
security, are important, and
DNSBench v1 delivers useful reports on all of those rather quickly and automatically, as well as leading to the
Spoofability test -
https://www.grc.com/dns/dns.htm - cool or what?
Thanks.