Cloudflare DNS PSN problem

[itstaha17]

Hello.
So I use Stormfiber and recently ping to Cloudflare DNS servers has been really good (40ms) while Google DNS has gone to 120ms. So i decided to switch to Cloudflare.

Everything runs smoothly except that my PSN fails to sign in only on Cloudflare DNS servers (1.1.1.1 and 1.0.0.1). Works fine on every other DNS. It even gives me NAT Type 2 when testing, the only error it gives is that it took too long to sign in/failed. Is there any solution to this? Thank you.

 

[murtaza12]

Hello.
So I use Stormfiber and recently ping to Cloudflare DNS servers has been really good (40ms) while Google DNS has gone to 120ms. So i decided to switch to Cloudflare.

Everything runs smoothly except that my PSN fails to sign in only on Cloudflare DNS servers (1.1.1.1 and 1.0.0.1). Works fine on every other DNS. It even gives me NAT Type 2 when testing, the only error it gives is that it took too long to sign in/failed. Is there any solution to this? Thank you.

Can you ping 1.1.1.1 and 1.0.0.1 from your PC, and is your connection on PIE or TW?

I have Transworld and use CloudFlare on my PS4, haven't had any issues with it.

 

[itstaha17]

Yes I can ping 1.1.1.1. Getting 40ms.
I think I am on PIE.

I have my ONT bridged connected to my TP LINK WR940N router. Can it be the the problem?

 

[murtaza12]

Yes I can ping 1.1.1.1. Getting 40ms.
I think I am on PIE.

I have my ONT bridged connected to my TP LINK WR940N router. Can it be the the problem?

Seems to be PIE related, I also had some issues using 1.1.1.1 on PTCL, but no such issues on TW.

Bridging ONT is not causing this, mine is also bridged to my router.

 

[ymailpk]

Yes I can ping 1.1.1.1. Getting 40ms.
I think I am on PIE.

I have my ONT bridged connected to my TP LINK WR940N router. Can it be the the problem?

Kindly guide me the procedure to bridge mode;
i am using stormfiber huawei ont EG8247H5 and asus rt ac68u router:
Thanks in advance.

 

[shaheerk]

Why not use 8.8.8.8? I Don't use Cloudfare's cause they don't give you the closest IP for CDNs (it's part of their "privacy" policy).

OpenDNS and Google both do.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[AlienX]

I am using 1.1.1.1 and 1.0.0.1 for about 6 months now. It's very reliable but to really benefit from the DNS, you should set it in router settings.

I had problems with slow PS4 downloads earlier, but not since shifting to fibre optic connection. Google DNS is not safe as they use the traffic to target ads.

 

[AlienX]

I get 112ms on 1.1.1.1 but 57ms on 8.8.8.8, but interestingly 1.1.1.1 resolves IPs faster and browsing (especially apps like reddit, instagram, etc) is faster.

 

[MrGutsy]

I get 20ms on 1.1.1.1 and 60ms on 8.8.8.8.
Browsing is notable faster with 1.1.1.1 as sites significantly resolves faster.

 

[shaheerk]

I am using 1.1.1.1 and 1.0.0.1 for about 6 months now. It's very reliable but to really benefit from the DNS, you should set it in router settings.

I had problems with slow PS4 downloads earlier, but not since shifting to fibre optic connection. Google DNS is not safe as they use the traffic to target ads.

Akamai and other CDNs don't play nice with Cloudfare. For example, if you try to ping ax.itunes.apple.com using Google's DNS, you'll get an IP that's got pings lower than 80ms (on average, regardless of your ISP). If you use Cloudfare, it goes as high as 250ms. This is ONE CDN. Using C&W DNS would be better. Or even Level 3's resolvers would be better (since you connect to the UK/EU ones and pings to the UK/EU are around 160ms).

I get 112ms on 1.1.1.1 but 57ms on 8.8.8.8, but interestingly 1.1.1.1 resolves IPs faster and browsing (especially apps like reddit, instagram, etc) is faster.

That's a redherring regarding Google's DNS. They say on their website that they use anomymized query requests. There's no way they can use the DNS resolvers for serving ads. The only way they can serve ads is if there's a cookie on your computer and their websites have Google ads.

Secondly, I'm getting 30ms on 1.1.1.1 and 65ms on 8.8.8.8. Both resolve at the same time. Many ISPs here and services abroad tend to rely on Google's DNS servers (either as a primary source or a secondary backup).

So - in essence, two things:
1. the time it takes to ping the server matters - 160ms is slower than 60ms, but eyelids flashing is over 100ms (and that's pretty fast).
2. the time for the resolver to respond to your query matters (most public resolvers are fast anyway with huge caches).
3. the actual IP resolved matters the most (in conjunction with the above three). There's no point if a DNS server is redirecting you to a much farther away IP when a closer IP is available. And even Cloudfare's got servers within PTCL's network, the IPs they're giving aren't closer to us - but are closer to the Americans. BUT
4. Sometimes, the IP resolved (be it near or far) could have congestion on its route, but those are outliers since CDNs are supposed to alleviate that issue.

Changing your DNS servers matter significantly with CDNs. And most of the websites you access are hosted on CDNs. Even YTS Torrents. Or EZTV.

For me, this leaves out Cloudfare. It's either Google, OpenDNS or sometimes, Satcomm's DNS servers (Karachi - which fall back onto Google's anyway and are pretty fast - except when they're not).

 

[manobilla]

Akamai and other CDNs don't play nice with Cloudfare. For example, if you try to ping ax.itunes.apple.com using Google's DNS, you'll get an IP that's got pings lower than 80ms (on average, regardless of your ISP). If you use Cloudfare, it goes as high as 250ms. This is ONE CDN. Using C&W DNS would be better. Or even Level 3's resolvers would be better (since you connect to the UK/EU ones and pings to the UK/EU are around 160ms).



That's a redherring regarding Google's DNS. They say on their website that they use anomymized query requests. There's no way they can use the DNS resolvers for serving ads. The only way they can serve ads is if there's a cookie on your computer and their websites have Google ads.

Secondly, I'm getting 30ms on 1.1.1.1 and 65ms on 8.8.8.8. Both resolve at the same time. Many ISPs here and services abroad tend to rely on Google's DNS servers (either as a primary source or a secondary backup).

So - in essence, two things:
1. the time it takes to ping the server matters - 160ms is slower than 60ms, but eyelids flashing is over 100ms (and that's pretty fast).
2. the time for the resolver to respond to your query matters (most public resolvers are fast anyway with huge caches).
3. the actual IP resolved matters the most (in conjunction with the above three). There's no point if a DNS server is redirecting you to a much farther away IP when a closer IP is available. And even Cloudfare's got servers within PTCL's network, the IPs they're giving aren't closer to us - but are closer to the Americans. BUT
4. Sometimes, the IP resolved (be it near or far) could have congestion on its route, but those are outliers since CDNs are supposed to alleviate that issue.

Changing your DNS servers matter significantly with CDNs. And most of the websites you access are hosted on CDNs. Even YTS Torrents. Or EZTV.

For me, this leaves out Cloudfare. It's either Google, OpenDNS or sometimes, Satcomm's DNS servers (Karachi - which fall back onto Google's anyway and are pretty fast - except when they're not).

cloudflare dns is not safe to use when they are also hosting websites?

 

[shaheerk]

cloudflare dns is not safe to use when they are also hosting websites?

That's a non-sequitur. It has nothing to do with hosting websites. They're independent of each other

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[manobilla]

That's a non-sequitur. It has nothing to do with hosting websites. They're independent of each other

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

then what you meant by this said in previous post "Changing your DNS servers matter significantly with CDNs. And most of the websites you access are hosted on CDNs. Even YTS Torrents. Or EZTV.

For me, this leaves out Cloudfare"

 

[AlienX]

.............

I did new trace and ping and yes, using 1.1.1.1 gives 275ms on ax.itunes.apple.com. Falling back to ISP dns gave me 25ms and so as 8.8.8.8 which gives 27ms. ISP DNS usually gives me problems with missing content or placeholders with errors.

I guess for US region 1.1.1.1 works quite well https://www.dnsperf.com

I will run new tests as it's been a long time. I usually set up my router and forget about it.

Interestingly speedtest ping to my ISP server in LHR from RWP is 9ms round trip.

 

[shaheerk]

then what you meant by this said in previous post "Changing your DNS servers matter significantly with CDNs. And most of the websites you access are hosted on CDNs. Even YTS Torrents. Or EZTV.

For me, this leaves out Cloudfare"

Basically, CDNs are deployed worldwide and they MAY or MAY NOT have different IPs for different regions. For e.g., Google's 8.8.8.8 is one IP but deployed globally. Other websites have one hostname (e.g. CNN) but have multiple IPs. The issue arises when you're trying to resolve domains with multiple IPs (and not the other way round). E.g. CNN - depending on the DNS server you use, you can either be redirected to a CDN in Europe, or the UAE, or somewhere else. But for other websites such as YTS.ag, since the IP resolved is the same, changing the DNS server won't matter but what matters is your ISP's routing to that IP.

Hope this helps.

I did new trace and ping and yes, using 1.1.1.1 gives 275ms on ax.itunes.apple.com. Falling back to ISP dns gave me 25ms and so as 8.8.8.8 which gives 27ms. ISP DNS usually gives me problems with missing content or placeholders with errors.

Bingo!

I will run new tests as it's been a long time. I usually set up my router and forget about it.

Yep, that's what I do when I get a new connection - see which one resolves faster (OpenDNS or Google) and also test which resolver gives a faster IP (latency-wise) to sip.skype.com. And if I were living in the UK or the US, C&W or Level 3's resolvers might be tested - but most of the time, OpenDNS or Google's would suffice.

Interestingly speedtest ping to my ISP server in LHR from RWP is 9ms round trip.

That's about normal. Karachi is around 25ms, +-5ms.

 

[AlienX]

....................

I have shifted to google DNS until I do some new tests at random times.