Pros and cons of router-based DNS vs. computer-based DNS

From DNS Reconfiguration Guide:

Indeed this seems to be the case with the router that I tested (vs. using the same DNS servers on a computer) with DNS Benchmark.

 

I have cheap Linksys E1200 and DNS actually seems to be a bit faster. The max was 0,401 second for the uncached request.

 

In my case, the reliability (tested with DNS Benchmark) of my router-based DNS was usually less than 100%, even when configured to use DNS servers that usually get 100% reliability when used on my computer.

 

I guess, that also depend on the brand, not just the price. I would avoid Belkin for sure and I heard, that ASUS is not any better either.

 

Speaking about DNS. This list needs to be updated, the sunbelt/clearcloud DNS service has been discontinued.

https://www.grc.com/dns/alternatives.htm

 

You should use your isp dns - this way you can blame them if things go wrong.
Furthermore, routers are designed to do the specific work, and hosts behind them are a different matter.
Mrk

 

the grc benchmark is a bit long in the tooth. it also has a few known problems. better is google's 'namebench' program.

p.s. - i use either 'acrylic dns proxy' or maradns's recursive dns proxy, 'deadwood', with a fast dns ip pair from 'namebench' and my router as a third as backup. which proxy i use depends on which one's latest update works best for me. currently i use deadwood as acrylic was not resolving some addresses correctly.

 

I've been having intermittent problems accessing some websites since I starting using a different ISP. So I'm trying alternative RFC compliant DNS servers.

 

Just did another test and computer returned only 98% reliability and uncached requests are 2 times better on router.