Issues with 1.1.1.1 public resolver and WARP

Note that if you use 1.1.1.1, you apparently can&#x27;t visit archive.is links. I&#x27;m not sure why, but around a dozen people on HN have confirmed this. (At least as of a couple months ago.)<p>I think the world could use more alternatives to 8.8.8.8. Hopefully 1.1.1.1 will become more reliable as the years tick by.<p>(Do you use something besides 8.8.8.8 or 1.1.1.1? If so, post it here! Collecting reliable DNS servers might be a niche hobby, but it&#x27;s a fun one. I was going to suggest 9.9.9.9 aka Quad9, but apparently it comes with strings attached. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=16728214">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=16728214</a>)

Just a reminder for anyone on the fence, or who has not considered it previously...<p>Running your own DNS resolver is super easy. It probably has the highest ROI of any self-hosted service, because it is <i>so</i> easy and inexpensive to do.<p>I recommend Unbound: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;nlnetlabs.nl&#x2F;projects&#x2F;unbound" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;nlnetlabs.nl&#x2F;projects&#x2F;unbound</a>

I’ve just started using Warp+ and it has been excellent for my specific use case: better peering to my Plex server while in another continent. Plex was unusable and now it’s not. Overall very happy despite this brief outage.

What&#x27;s the point of having a secondary endpoint 1.0.0.1 if an outage breaks both that <i>and</i> 1.1.1.1? Are these two servers not running in physically isolated regions with independent code deploys?

They&#x27;ve posted their incident report: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.cloudflare.com&#x2F;1-1-1-1-lookup-failures-on-october-4th-2023&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.cloudflare.com&#x2F;1-1-1-1-lookup-failures-on-octob...</a>

Duplicate: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=37762227">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=37762227</a>

Crazy how many things a single thing breaking takes down with it

(Unaffected by this).<p>Found it the reverse chronological order (with timestamps being a smaller&#x2F;lighter font, at least on mobile) to have caused extra thinking, which, for a status, seems undesireable.<p>I get wanting to expose the latest <i>thing</i> first, but the &quot;top-posting&quot; style seems intuitive. Perhaps, as a compromise, a status page would have a &quot;Latest&quot; block at the top, with the timestamp prominent, where the latest known status would be placed by whatever makes the updates, but the updates themselves are in the chronological order?