DoT vs DoH performance and response time

dash-dns
dns-resolver
#1

From a technical point of view, which has the fastest response times. DoT or DoH? Assuming both can be used with ones own dns resolver (unbound).

#2

Have you tried to run some benchmarks? I’d assume they are pretty close, maybe DoT is a tad ahead because there is one protocol layer less but that might also be negligible. Overall I somewhat doubt there’d be a significant difference.

#3

No, but I’m happy to do such a test. Are there any Linux command line utilities for this?

speculating a little, would DoH work over http2 or even Quic? In that case there might be advantages from persistent connections, streams and such?

#4

There might be specific DNS benchmarks. If not you can always run individual queries in a large-enough loop and time it using time.

#5

I don’t have benchmarks, but my gut feel DoT is faster than DoH.

<old man mode> www ruined the internet. You'll pry Gopher from my cold dead hands. </OMM>

1 Like
#6

I would assume DoH works over, both, 1.1 and 2.0. Quic, respectively 3.0, is probably not supported yet :man_shrugging:.

As for the mentioned features, considering both protocol wrappers use TCP they could both utilise persistent connections, but whether it is implemented is a different question. Lots of speculation from my side I am afraid.

I’d probably summarise it as differences will be negligible, but benchmarks could be certainly interesting.