5 ms·

Google Cloud DNS

158 points by valhallarecords 12y ago

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
opendais 12y ago
Very nice...let us just hope they add Geo and/or Latency based routing. ;)
- TheSwordsman 12y ago
  That and DNSSEC support. If they had DNSSEC support, I could see my organization moving to them.
  - IgorPartola 12y ago
    You actually use DNSSEC in production?
    - opendais 12y ago
      Quite a few people do use DNSSEC in production. An example of what can go wrong tho? http://blog.pagerduty.com/2013/12/outage-post-mortem-dec-11-2013/ http://blog.pagerduty.com/2013/12/outage-post-mortem-dec-11-... Just a potential issue to keep in mind for people who do.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
nodesocket 12y ago
DNS is so cheap, and Amazon Route53 has such an advantage with their latency based routing, health checks, and integrations with other AWS services. Honestly zones are $0.50 and $0.50 per million queries. You have to be pushing lots of DNS queries to have costs even exceed a tiny bill of $20 a month. It is the definition of a lot of engineers hours and infrastructure costs for literally no profit for the company. However, it is a basic service every hosting provides has to offer to be competitive.
- gtaylor 12y ago
  Given their other Cloud-oriented offerings (Compute Engine and App Engine), I'm not so sure they are doing this to make gobs of money. It's a hole in their service portfolio that they are filling. This can indirectly lead to people being more comfortable choosing Compute Engine, increasing adoption and earning Google more money as a whole. AWS has Route 53 (which is probably not a huge money maker), Google needs to match them on this. I expect Google's offering to improve over time technically, just like Route 53 has. DNS is but one piece of each company's portfolio, but it's such a critical piece that it's expected to be there.
- tomschlick 12y ago
  Hopefully the lower cost from google causes aws to drop prices for this service as well.
  - nodesocket 12y ago
    Really, how much would you save? We we even talking dollars a month?
  - gtaylor 12y ago
    Unless your app operates at a truly massive scale with a very specific set of characteristics, this won't save you even a minuscule fraction on your total budget. Route 53 is dirt freaking cheap.
geekam 12y ago
Naïve question but what kind of organizations will benefit the most from this service? Or put it other way, the situations this service is needed for? Can anyone explain to me please?
- tedivm 12y ago
  The same type of people who use CDNs. If you want great performance globally it helps to have primary DNS services near by, rather than having lookups cross the world.
  - vishnugupta 12y ago
    I understand how CDNs are advantageous by having contents served from locations that are closer to origin of requests (typically browsers spread across the world or a country etc.,). However, for DNS service to be of similar use does it mean application servers are going to be spread across geographically? For end customers it doesn't matter as they will always use the DNS configured for them by their ISP in most of the cases unless one is tech savvy and tries to use some other DNS such as Google etc.,? Please help understand what am I missing here?
    - tedivm 12y ago
      You're an Australian Internet User. You want to see hampsterdance.com 'cause fuck it, you like hamsters. Your computer asks your ISP's DNS server for the record. If your ISP has it cached you're golden, but it turns out it probably isn't. So your ISP needs to go to ask the hampsterdance.com DNS server directly. If that server is in the United States then you're stuck waiting 133ms in one direction, 133ms back- you've now added a quarter of a second to that page loaded. Using a DNS CDN means that 266ms ends up being 15ms (keep in mind that these guys also peer with local ISPs to make things even faster).
      - BorisMelnik 12y ago
        Thank you very much for this explanation. So for example I have a very basic website with CMS. I use a CDN just because I want to give the best possible experience to my users. I get about 50k users per month, a lot of them are new. Would adding a paid DNS or "DNS CDN" as you put it help my user experience enough to matter?
benguild 12y ago
Is this free?
- kondro 12y ago
  The pricing is right there on the sidebar (third link). https://developers.google.com/cloud-dns/pricing https://developers.google.com/cloud-dns/pricing
- tomschlick 12y ago
  No. $0.20 per hosted zone + $0.40 per million queries (first usage tier).
tedivm 12y ago
I'm wondering how Dyn is taking this. These guys have been working on DNS for years, and were probably one of the first "managed DNS" or "enterprise DNS" services. Over time though they've failed to really innovate, or even keep up with standard (you can't use any of their value add services like the global traffic manager if you also want to use DNSSEC, for instance). Despite this their prices have remained ridiculously high. Now that other players are moving into the market at literally multiple orders of magnitude cheaper it's tough to see why any of their customers would stay. As a personal note, I would recommend the Edgecast DNS service over anything else. They have amazing customer support (something Google really lacks), and they've been in the CDN game for long enough to know that they are going to be around for awhile. They're also rather crazy about getting the best performance possible.
- nodesocket 12y ago
  EdgeCast looks nice, but minimum of $50 a month. http://www.edgecast.com/services/route-managed-dns/ http://www.edgecast.com/services/route-managed-dns/ We pay around $2 a month at Route53.
  - tedivm 12y ago
    Route53 is not a bad option. If you're using EdgeCast CDN as well you'll probably get a discount on DNS (and I will point out that the EdgeCast CDN is faster, and more importantly, a hell of a lot cheaper than Cloudfront is).
    - nieksand 12y ago
      For my use cases, CloudFront beat out EdgeCast quite a bit in price. (~20 TB / month commit with a request mix heavily biased towards NA and Europe).
      - maykelrr 12y ago
        @nieksand, feel free to get in touch with us at speedyrails.com (EdgeCast's resellers), I'm sure we can offer you a much better price than CloudFront's
MBlume 12y ago
Was this announced by Google today, or is this on HN because of the XKCD? If the former, did Google push the announcement because of the XKCD?
- MichaelTieso 12y ago
  I was thinking the same thing. Has XKCD predicted the future again?
- bredman 12y ago
  This was released on March 28th: http://googlecloudplatform.blogspot.com/2014/03/announcing-google-cloud-dns.html http://googlecloudplatform.blogspot.com/2014/03/announcing-g... Guess this is just on the front page because of XKCD about the other Google DNS product?
- jpatokal 12y ago
  The XKCD: http://xkcd.com/1361/ http://xkcd.com/1361/
- jbeda 12y ago
  We announced Cloud DNS at Cloud Platform Live on March 25th. It kind of got lost in the noise around the big price cuts.
  - dsl 12y ago
    Any chance of geographic and/or latency based views and edns-client-subnet support?
    - jbeda 12y ago
      I'm not up on what the plans for that team are right now. I can say that it is an explicit goal to expose more and more of Google's infrastructure through cloud -- including how we route traffic globally.
- kapsel 12y ago
  Not sure, but this one is funny: dig +short -t txt google-public-dns-a.google.com
rdl 12y ago
I wish either AWS Route 53 or Google Cloud DNS would support being a BIND protocol secondary :(
- scott_karana 12y ago
  No kidding. I love the local speeds, and no doubt Google and Amazon do a good job of redundancy, but I'm sure as hell not going to put all my eggs in one basket. Not with DNS. I had the same problem earlier this year, and if Rackspace or Route53 had AXFR support, I would have used them in a heartbeat...
  - ithkuil 12y ago
    axfr support might be useful even if you end up using them as primary: 1. migration 2. standard "config" API. You just keep up using your scripts to generate/update bind/tinydns configs.
- colmmacc 12y ago
  Route 53 developer here. That's on our roadmap, but in the mean time there is this; https://code.google.com/p/route53d/ https://code.google.com/p/route53d/
  - robinson-wall 12y ago
    Nice. Any idea if "internal" zones (private DNS for my VPC) will be supported by route53 at any point?
kenrick95 12y ago
They are moving towards http://xkcd.com/1361/ http://xkcd.com/1361/ :P
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
jonah 12y ago
Nice pricing. I've been using UltraDNS for many years but this looks good too.
- robertcope 12y ago
  Take a look at DNS Made Easy. robert
jread 12y ago
It's a start - barebones authoritative DNS only - no monitoring/failover, load balancing, Geo, LBR, etc - provisioning via API only. Route 53 started out this way, and has since added many of these features and now has almost 7% Alexa 10k marketshare and rapidly growing. I created a browser test that measures recursive DNS query times. You can test Google DNS query performance using this link: http://bit.ly/1nY4e60 http://bit.ly/1nY4e60
- nickpresta 12y ago
  My results, from Toronto: http://i.imgur.com/hOayTQH.png http://i.imgur.com/hOayTQH.png
- biot 12y ago
  Please don't post mystery meat URLs. The bit.ly link goes to: http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest/run?services_CDN=&serviceTypes[]=DNS&services_DNS=google:dns&tests[]=t&tests[]=w&tests[]=l&tests[]=d http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest/run?services_CDN=&serviceT...
- tfountain 12y ago
  Could you provide any more info on how this test works? Where are the tests performed from, or do they run client side? Does it query name servers directly, or if not, how does it avoid ISP-level DNS caching influencing the results?
  - jread 12y ago
    Tests are from your connection using whatever resolver chain your ISP has in place. It uses a wildcard name record and an 8 byte json-p include. It alternates between downloading that file from the same origin using a cached DNS record (test run up includes 3 downloads to prime the resolvers with a cached hostname) and an uncached record (a new randomly generated hostname) and reports the difference in time between the two.
gibybo 12y ago
Their example for a 'high traffic' site struck me by surprise. With all the caching that goes on with DNS queries, 1.2B in a month seems incredibly high. I wouldn't have even imagined google.com getting that many requests to the authoritative name servers. Can someone with a better idea of how traffic corresponds to DNS queries give me some perspective? How many DNS queries are the name servers for a typical Alex top 10 domain getting?
- ithkuil 12y ago
  if you need DNS based failover you want low TTLs , e.g Google.com A record is 100s
  - gibybo 12y ago
    Still though, aren't most consumers using their ISP's DNS servers, which will cache the same response for all of their customers in a region?
    - takeda 12y ago
      It all depends on how high ttl is, the number of queries increase exponentially as you decrease it, with ttl=0 you have no caching. My company makes about 160qps which translates to about half billion per month, so it doesn't seem too unrealistic.
ksec 12y ago
There is no point comparing this to AWS Route53. Purely in terms of speed Cloud DNS win Hands Down. I am not sure if the Cloud DNS is the same as their own DNS infrastructure, if so it is pretty damn fast. The only other two DNS services I recommend is DNSMadeEasy and EdgeCast DNS. Both happens to one of the most affordable as well as fastest. ( Strange combination ) The only bad thing is EdgeCast got brought by Verizon. I am worry if anything bad will happen.
- robertcope 12y ago
  Really? In my very primitive tests, Route53 is considerably faster than Cloud DNS. And DNS Made Easy is faster than both of them. Personally, DNS Made Easy is my favorite provider by far. Extremely fast, reliable, and priced very well. Plus, you don't have to deal with a sales guy unless you really want to. I love it when Dyn or other big providers try and woo me. Thousands of dollars a month for DNS? Bahaha. robert
gggggggg 12y ago
They really need a free bracket. For example, anything under $1 a month. From my perspective, I would prefer to pay $20 a year, than $1 a month.
ctz 12y ago
"403. That’s an error. Your client does not have permission to get URL /cloud-dns/ from this server. (Client IP address: [my-ipv6-addr]) We're sorry, but this service is not available in your country." Google is denying access to services based on their broken ipv6 geolocation data (they think I am in Tehran, but I'm in London.)
- andreaso 12y ago
  Yeah, I'm getting that same premium experience. Appear to also hit Google Apps as well as any AppeEngine hosted site.
  - dcc1 12y ago
    Same problem for weeks now, apparently New York is in Iran
    - packetslave 12y ago
      @dcc1: could you please email me at brian@<my username>.com? I work for Google Netops and would like to get some additional info from you so we can debug this.
known 12y ago
http://wiki.opennicproject.org/ClosestT2Servers http://wiki.opennicproject.org/ClosestT2Servers
jstalin 12y ago
I'd be interested in seeing a speed comparison with Cloudflare. Cloudflare's DNS is completely free and it's the fastest DNS service I'm aware of.
- chewmieser 12y ago
  Another user posted a link to CloudHarmony for speed testing: http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest/run?services_CDN=&services_Server=&services_Storage=&services_Platform=&serviceTypes%5B%5D=DNS&services_DNS=AWS%3ARoute53%2CCloudFlare%3ADNS%2Cgoogle%3Adns&tests%5B%5D=t&tests%5B%5D=w&tests%5B%5D=l&tests%5B%5D=d&regions%5B%5D=us&regions_us=&regions_eu=&regions_asia=&regions_br=&x=62&y=12&referer= http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest/run?services_CDN=&services...
mrsaint 12y ago
I added a quick guide how to setup Cloud DNS for your domain. https://www.zeitgeist.se/2014/05/01/google-cloud-dns-step-by-step/ https://www.zeitgeist.se/2014/05/01/google-cloud-dns-step-by...

Google Cloud DNS

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

opendais 12y ago

Very nice...let us just hope they add Geo and/or Latency based routing. ;)

TheSwordsman 12y ago
That and DNSSEC support. If they had DNSSEC support, I could see my organization moving to them.
- IgorPartola 12y ago
  You actually use DNSSEC in production?
  - opendais 12y ago
    Quite a few people do use DNSSEC in production. An example of what can go wrong tho? http://blog.pagerduty.com/2013/12/outage-post-mortem-dec-11-2013/ http://blog.pagerduty.com/2013/12/outage-post-mortem-dec-11-... Just a potential issue to keep in mind for people who do.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

nodesocket 12y ago

DNS is so cheap, and Amazon Route53 has such an advantage with their latency based routing, health checks, and integrations with other AWS services. Honestly zones are $0.50 and $0.50 per million queries. You have to be pushing lots of DNS queries to have costs even exceed a tiny bill of $20 a month. It is the definition of a lot of engineers hours and infrastructure costs for literally no profit for the company. However, it is a basic service every hosting provides has to offer to be competitive.

gtaylor 12y ago
Given their other Cloud-oriented offerings (Compute Engine and App Engine), I'm not so sure they are doing this to make gobs of money. It's a hole in their service portfolio that they are filling. This can indirectly lead to people being more comfortable choosing Compute Engine, increasing adoption and earning Google more money as a whole. AWS has Route 53 (which is probably not a huge money maker), Google needs to match them on this. I expect Google's offering to improve over time technically, just like Route 53 has. DNS is but one piece of each company's portfolio, but it's such a critical piece that it's expected to be there.
tomschlick 12y ago
Hopefully the lower cost from google causes aws to drop prices for this service as well.
- nodesocket 12y ago
  Really, how much would you save? We we even talking dollars a month?
- gtaylor 12y ago
  Unless your app operates at a truly massive scale with a very specific set of characteristics, this won't save you even a minuscule fraction on your total budget. Route 53 is dirt freaking cheap.

geekam 12y ago

Naïve question but what kind of organizations will benefit the most from this service? Or put it other way, the situations this service is needed for? Can anyone explain to me please?

tedivm 12y ago
The same type of people who use CDNs. If you want great performance globally it helps to have primary DNS services near by, rather than having lookups cross the world.
- vishnugupta 12y ago
  I understand how CDNs are advantageous by having contents served from locations that are closer to origin of requests (typically browsers spread across the world or a country etc.,). However, for DNS service to be of similar use does it mean application servers are going to be spread across geographically? For end customers it doesn't matter as they will always use the DNS configured for them by their ISP in most of the cases unless one is tech savvy and tries to use some other DNS such as Google etc.,? Please help understand what am I missing here?
  - tedivm 12y ago
    You're an Australian Internet User. You want to see hampsterdance.com 'cause fuck it, you like hamsters. Your computer asks your ISP's DNS server for the record. If your ISP has it cached you're golden, but it turns out it probably isn't. So your ISP needs to go to ask the hampsterdance.com DNS server directly. If that server is in the United States then you're stuck waiting 133ms in one direction, 133ms back- you've now added a quarter of a second to that page loaded. Using a DNS CDN means that 266ms ends up being 15ms (keep in mind that these guys also peer with local ISPs to make things even faster).
    - BorisMelnik 12y ago
      Thank you very much for this explanation. So for example I have a very basic website with CMS. I use a CDN just because I want to give the best possible experience to my users. I get about 50k users per month, a lot of them are new. Would adding a paid DNS or "DNS CDN" as you put it help my user experience enough to matter?

benguild 12y ago

Is this free?

kondro 12y ago
The pricing is right there on the sidebar (third link). https://developers.google.com/cloud-dns/pricing https://developers.google.com/cloud-dns/pricing
tomschlick 12y ago
No. $0.20 per hosted zone + $0.40 per million queries (first usage tier).

tedivm 12y ago

I'm wondering how Dyn is taking this. These guys have been working on DNS for years, and were probably one of the first "managed DNS" or "enterprise DNS" services. Over time though they've failed to really innovate, or even keep up with standard (you can't use any of their value add services like the global traffic manager if you also want to use DNSSEC, for instance). Despite this their prices have remained ridiculously high. Now that other players are moving into the market at literally multiple orders of magnitude cheaper it's tough to see why any of their customers would stay. As a personal note, I would recommend the Edgecast DNS service over anything else. They have amazing customer support (something Google really lacks), and they've been in the CDN game for long enough to know that they are going to be around for awhile. They're also rather crazy about getting the best performance possible.

nodesocket 12y ago
EdgeCast looks nice, but minimum of $50 a month. http://www.edgecast.com/services/route-managed-dns/ http://www.edgecast.com/services/route-managed-dns/ We pay around $2 a month at Route53.
- tedivm 12y ago
  Route53 is not a bad option. If you're using EdgeCast CDN as well you'll probably get a discount on DNS (and I will point out that the EdgeCast CDN is faster, and more importantly, a hell of a lot cheaper than Cloudfront is).
  - nieksand 12y ago
    For my use cases, CloudFront beat out EdgeCast quite a bit in price. (~20 TB / month commit with a request mix heavily biased towards NA and Europe).
    - maykelrr 12y ago
      @nieksand, feel free to get in touch with us at speedyrails.com (EdgeCast's resellers), I'm sure we can offer you a much better price than CloudFront's

MBlume 12y ago

Was this announced by Google today, or is this on HN because of the XKCD? If the former, did Google push the announcement because of the XKCD?

MichaelTieso 12y ago
I was thinking the same thing. Has XKCD predicted the future again?
bredman 12y ago
This was released on March 28th: http://googlecloudplatform.blogspot.com/2014/03/announcing-google-cloud-dns.html http://googlecloudplatform.blogspot.com/2014/03/announcing-g... Guess this is just on the front page because of XKCD about the other Google DNS product?
jpatokal 12y ago
The XKCD: http://xkcd.com/1361/ http://xkcd.com/1361/
jbeda 12y ago
We announced Cloud DNS at Cloud Platform Live on March 25th. It kind of got lost in the noise around the big price cuts.
- dsl 12y ago
  Any chance of geographic and/or latency based views and edns-client-subnet support?
  - jbeda 12y ago
    I'm not up on what the plans for that team are right now. I can say that it is an explicit goal to expose more and more of Google's infrastructure through cloud -- including how we route traffic globally.
kapsel 12y ago
Not sure, but this one is funny: dig +short -t txt google-public-dns-a.google.com

rdl 12y ago

I wish either AWS Route 53 or Google Cloud DNS would support being a BIND protocol secondary :(

scott_karana 12y ago
No kidding. I love the local speeds, and no doubt Google and Amazon do a good job of redundancy, but I'm sure as hell not going to put all my eggs in one basket. Not with DNS. I had the same problem earlier this year, and if Rackspace or Route53 had AXFR support, I would have used them in a heartbeat...
- ithkuil 12y ago
  axfr support might be useful even if you end up using them as primary: 1. migration 2. standard "config" API. You just keep up using your scripts to generate/update bind/tinydns configs.
colmmacc 12y ago
Route 53 developer here. That's on our roadmap, but in the mean time there is this; https://code.google.com/p/route53d/ https://code.google.com/p/route53d/
- robinson-wall 12y ago
  Nice. Any idea if "internal" zones (private DNS for my VPC) will be supported by route53 at any point?

kenrick95 12y ago

They are moving towards http://xkcd.com/1361/ http://xkcd.com/1361/ :P

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

jonah 12y ago

Nice pricing. I've been using UltraDNS for many years but this looks good too.

robertcope 12y ago
Take a look at DNS Made Easy. robert

jread 12y ago

It's a start - barebones authoritative DNS only - no monitoring/failover, load balancing, Geo, LBR, etc - provisioning via API only. Route 53 started out this way, and has since added many of these features and now has almost 7% Alexa 10k marketshare and rapidly growing. I created a browser test that measures recursive DNS query times. You can test Google DNS query performance using this link: http://bit.ly/1nY4e60 http://bit.ly/1nY4e60

nickpresta 12y ago
My results, from Toronto: http://i.imgur.com/hOayTQH.png http://i.imgur.com/hOayTQH.png
biot 12y ago
Please don't post mystery meat URLs. The bit.ly link goes to: http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest/run?services_CDN=&serviceTypes[]=DNS&services_DNS=google:dns&tests[]=t&tests[]=w&tests[]=l&tests[]=d http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest/run?services_CDN=&serviceT...
tfountain 12y ago
Could you provide any more info on how this test works? Where are the tests performed from, or do they run client side? Does it query name servers directly, or if not, how does it avoid ISP-level DNS caching influencing the results?
- jread 12y ago
  Tests are from your connection using whatever resolver chain your ISP has in place. It uses a wildcard name record and an 8 byte json-p include. It alternates between downloading that file from the same origin using a cached DNS record (test run up includes 3 downloads to prime the resolvers with a cached hostname) and an uncached record (a new randomly generated hostname) and reports the difference in time between the two.

gibybo 12y ago

Their example for a 'high traffic' site struck me by surprise. With all the caching that goes on with DNS queries, 1.2B in a month seems incredibly high. I wouldn't have even imagined google.com getting that many requests to the authoritative name servers. Can someone with a better idea of how traffic corresponds to DNS queries give me some perspective? How many DNS queries are the name servers for a typical Alex top 10 domain getting?

ithkuil 12y ago
if you need DNS based failover you want low TTLs , e.g Google.com A record is 100s
- gibybo 12y ago
  Still though, aren't most consumers using their ISP's DNS servers, which will cache the same response for all of their customers in a region?
  - takeda 12y ago
    It all depends on how high ttl is, the number of queries increase exponentially as you decrease it, with ttl=0 you have no caching. My company makes about 160qps which translates to about half billion per month, so it doesn't seem too unrealistic.

ksec 12y ago

There is no point comparing this to AWS Route53. Purely in terms of speed Cloud DNS win Hands Down. I am not sure if the Cloud DNS is the same as their own DNS infrastructure, if so it is pretty damn fast. The only other two DNS services I recommend is DNSMadeEasy and EdgeCast DNS. Both happens to one of the most affordable as well as fastest. ( Strange combination ) The only bad thing is EdgeCast got brought by Verizon. I am worry if anything bad will happen.

robertcope 12y ago
Really? In my very primitive tests, Route53 is considerably faster than Cloud DNS. And DNS Made Easy is faster than both of them. Personally, DNS Made Easy is my favorite provider by far. Extremely fast, reliable, and priced very well. Plus, you don't have to deal with a sales guy unless you really want to. I love it when Dyn or other big providers try and woo me. Thousands of dollars a month for DNS? Bahaha. robert

gggggggg 12y ago

They really need a free bracket. For example, anything under $1 a month. From my perspective, I would prefer to pay $20 a year, than $1 a month.

ctz 12y ago

"403. That’s an error. Your client does not have permission to get URL /cloud-dns/ from this server. (Client IP address: [my-ipv6-addr]) We're sorry, but this service is not available in your country." Google is denying access to services based on their broken ipv6 geolocation data (they think I am in Tehran, but I'm in London.)

andreaso 12y ago
Yeah, I'm getting that same premium experience. Appear to also hit Google Apps as well as any AppeEngine hosted site.
- dcc1 12y ago
  Same problem for weeks now, apparently New York is in Iran
  - packetslave 12y ago
    @dcc1: could you please email me at brian@<my username>.com? I work for Google Netops and would like to get some additional info from you so we can debug this.

known 12y ago

http://wiki.opennicproject.org/ClosestT2Servers http://wiki.opennicproject.org/ClosestT2Servers

jstalin 12y ago

I'd be interested in seeing a speed comparison with Cloudflare. Cloudflare's DNS is completely free and it's the fastest DNS service I'm aware of.

chewmieser 12y ago
Another user posted a link to CloudHarmony for speed testing: http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest/run?services_CDN=&services_Server=&services_Storage=&services_Platform=&serviceTypes%5B%5D=DNS&services_DNS=AWS%3ARoute53%2CCloudFlare%3ADNS%2Cgoogle%3Adns&tests%5B%5D=t&tests%5B%5D=w&tests%5B%5D=l&tests%5B%5D=d&regions%5B%5D=us&regions_us=&regions_eu=&regions_asia=&regions_br=&x=62&y=12&referer= http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest/run?services_CDN=&services...

mrsaint 12y ago

I added a quick guide how to setup Cloud DNS for your domain. https://www.zeitgeist.se/2014/05/01/google-cloud-dns-step-by-step/ https://www.zeitgeist.se/2014/05/01/google-cloud-dns-step-by...