Re:DNSCrypt – A protocol to improve DNS security
by tankenmate on Thursday March 30, 2017 @03:29AM
(#13993583)
The default port of 443 is somewhat bizarre, it's almost guaranteed to conflict on a server. They could have applied to IETF / IANA for port 253 (it currently reserved / unassigned).
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:DNSCrypt – A protocol to improve DNS security
by INTPenis on Thursday March 30, 2017 @04:17AM
(#13993735)
As long as you can set it on both ends it doesn't really matter. It's actually better for clients that the servers listen on 443.
If it conflicts then that means you're putting multiple services on your server. Don't.
Personally I've put dnscrypt on my regular dns servers, they only listen on 53.
Re:DNSCrypt – A protocol to improve DNS security
by _jal on Thursday March 30, 2017 @10:26AM
(#13995583)
It is intentional. There are creepy providers out there that really want you to use their DNS so they can surveil/gaslight you, so they block or redirect traffic to well-known DNS ports.
Putting it on 443 forces a choice between letting people manage their own DNS or blocking every store on the planet.
Re:DNSCrypt – A protocol to improve DNS security
by tresni on Sunday April 02, 2017 @01:17AM
(#14015916)
Definitely this. Also lots of weird hardware/software out there that tends to discard packets it can't understand (i.e. this doesn't look like a DNS packet going to port 53, let's drop it.) 443 generally works as it is expected to be encrypted by most middleware.
I would also say that most DNSCrypt-capable providers I know of can also do it on port 53.