In that case it is just about impossible to pick a good server, i.e. as long as it is not consistently horribly slow, it doesn’t matter which server you select. But I’ll tell you one thing, my little FastCache always comes out on top, yeah. The combination of the 2 fastest servers I could find and a cache work fabulously. ;D
Anyway, here is another testing tool. Just in case someone wants to compare testing tools. ;).
the google tool is good, I don’ deny that, and obviously good enough to tell you what are the best 5 servers for you (and the 5 slowest too ;D ), but again, as that’s what most people are looking for, not the one and only and overall fastest server, for your location, because there’s not such server.
I got it the first time. 
FastCache can simultaneously query two servers (not even mentioning the cache), which is beneficial for the exact reason you mentioned. To the best of my knowledge no version of Windows knows this little “trick”.
got to give that fastcache a try
Couldn’t get FastCache to work :-[
Yes, Gibson’s Benchmark tool is good. I’ve been trying it with several setups - that’s what told me about the order for OpenDNS.
If you read the history of this software on the grc forums, you will see it is considerably more sophisticated. When Steve finishes the docs on this and makes it “officially” public it will be the gold standard. It is a little rough around the edges, but even in the current configuration it provides some kind of explanation of the results and the forums at GRC show quite a lot of interesting findings built on the tool. Lots of pitfalls in testing were discovered and avoided.
It’s not so much that the load is changing. It’s more the fact that repeated tests are querying the same IP’s, which have since been added to the cache. Your first test is going to be the more accurate one. There is an entry in the NameBench FAQ about this.
Yeah, I’ve never been able to get it to work either… I first tried it several months ago when someone was recommending it on this forum. (perhaps Toxteth again?) I get an empty space in my taskbar, which if I mouse-over it it says FastCache, but there is no icon or menus, so I can’t actually set anything up. Another user at the time got the same results. I’ve tried it a few more times since then and still have no luck.
Precisely what I had. Uninstalling told me that the download was corrupt, but new d/l was the same.
An alternative to Fastcache: Deadwood.
I got exactly the same result with FastCache both times I installed and ran it. What is the secret of getting the GUI to appear so that the program can be set up and run properly?
~Maxx~
It appears there is something wrong with the program file or the installer. When I now install the program, the same problem occurs as some of you have experienced. That’s odd, it didn’t happen before.
For those willing to take the risk ;), here is the working program file. Replace the messed up .exe file and Fastcache will work the way it should. It is the latest version (1.03), but I downloaded this several months ago, before the “installation problem”.
[attachment deleted by admin]
A very late update to this thread. 
Here is a program that uses three DNS servers (yes, three servers!) AND a local cache. And if that wasn’t enough, it also has its own hosts file (like the one Windows uses, only better) that can be used for blocking ads and other nasties (optionally, of course).
http://mayakron.altervista.org/support/browse.php?path=Acrylic&name=Home
http://mayakron.altervista.org/support/browse.php?path=Acrylic&name=MoreAdvancedConfiguration
I hope this will be a good alternative for (the for some of you problematic) FastCache.
Some background info on the hosts option:
A technique still widely used for fighting ads on web pages is to fill the HOSTS file (which the Windows DNS Client uses as a static cache) with thousands of domain names which are known sources of ads. Unfortunately the Windows DNS Client does not handle a large HOSTS file very well. This limitation can be solved by a local DNS proxy which is capable of handling it in a more efficient way. With Acrylic you can expect responses within 1 millisecond on a P3-733mhz machine with a HOSTS file containing 100,000 domain names.
Has anyone tried ClearCloud DNS (http://clearclouddns.com)? I was wondering how is compares to Comodo SecureDNS or OpenDNS. I did find a review here: http://qmark.co.cc/2010/08/clearcloud-dns-review/
clearcloud is different from comodo and opendns. clear cloud blocks known malicious dns servers. neither comodo or opendns do this. (yet, comodo is going to start an active dns idk when)
No..this is just a DNS security that will detect malicious domains.
What i have cooking is much MUCH bigger Wink
Melih
Melih states that the comodo DNS will start detecting malicious domains
I think that will be in a week or two at most.
What is the privacy policy for Comodo DNS?
No logging would be perfect. 8)
Yes, indeed. Google’s DNS is supposed to be fast, but I bet it stores everything and uses it.
Well as soon as they do, I will switch and use it… ;D
oO(ponders on what the much bigger and better thing, secret is…)Oo 88)