Amazon Route 53

We didn't test any other product like Amazon Route 53, we were doing all these settings by ourselves.

We purchased our domain names through Networksolutions.com and do rely on their DNS services for basic functionality (SPF hard reject records, etc.), since it was included at no cost; however, for our main domains, we utilize Route 53 because of AWS's high availability, reasonable cost, and capabilities to integrate with EC2 and other security certificate services to make hosting on AWS simple. We also front-end some of our sites with Cloudflare and while it's not as streamlined as using AWS natively, it does a good job.

Amazon is priced higher than Google's DNS, but since our gear (Cloudfront, ALB, etc) is in AWS, Amazon Route 53 is easier to use sop we don't have to manage two vendors.

Cloudflare is also similar in the features to Route 53. However, since we are completely hosted on the AWS cloud, we can't use Cloudflare for configuring our internal networks, and integrating with the other services. The API based integration of AWS via Terraform is another factor that allows us to automate most of our deployments and manage them programmatically.

This was the POC that was done during the initial stage but we never put this in production

Amazon Route 53 DNS service is much better than GCP and Azure or any other cloud provider DNS service due to the fact that it not only provides basic DNS service but on top of it it offers firewall DNS feature i.e. rules and policies can be defined to allow/reject certain traffic. It also act as a load balancer across the regions which is missing or not available from other cloud based DNS service (different offering for this feature which means more cost)

Amazon Route 53 is intended for simple websites that host HTML5 or static content. This is probably the default solution if you need something simple and don't want to rent a web server to host a website. It is good to host full functional but simple website or HTML5 game.

When working with AWS, Route 53 is hands down the better solution. If you live in GCP, then Google Cloud DNS is the way to go. GoDaddy is more of a consumer-facing product and is perfectly fine when Services are not being utilized in any Cloud Environment. Eventually, all of our DNS ends up in AWS or GCP...

GoDaddy is fine if you just want to have a domain and set up a few simple records. But if part of your business is transferring domains and constantly updating records for new websites, email changes, and security, then a registrar-based DNS service just won't cut it. Route 53 has the tools for an advanced user who wants more control to avoid pitfalls of transfer downtime.

Kinda of costly and doesn't have many services which Amazon is able to offer. And Route 53 is slightly faster than it.

I only compared to BIND, as we intend to migrate to AWS as soon as possible.

Route 53 is one of those essential services that you'll inevitably come across. It's one of the easiest to understand and configure in AWS, and using it is helpful if you're making use of any other components in the AWS ecosystem because most other components will automatically be able to see and access your Route53 entries.

Both Azure DNS and GoDaddy's DNS works great, but when you use AWS services and infrastructure, it is much easier to use AWS DNS service. Using AWS DNS service you can manage and maintain your infrastructure in one place, it saves some time. If you use AWS services, you can integrate the DNS records and AWS services easily, compared to other solutions.

Infoblox is the one we used on premises and briefly looked at for AWS. Route 53 however is well suited for our needs and was easier to implement. As AWS was already new for use, learning Route 53 anew made no difference in selecting it.

CloudFlare has been good for anything external facing, but Route53 has met our needs perfectly for anything internal.

Route 53 is head and shoulders above GoDaddy. GoDaddy's DNS availability was problematic with us earlier on and at that time we made a decision to move our domains to Route 53 under Amazon. Since then we haven't experienced any DNS outages and it has been pretty rock solid. That wasn't the case when we were using GoDaddy.

Route53 was used because I initially thought we were going to have our infrastructure on AWS. Once our team transitioned to Google Cloud, I was left scrambling to migrate our DNS solution to point to those servers instead. Because there is a mandatory 45-day transfer wait period for hostnames, I had to route traffic through an S3 bucket because Route53 would not point to the server endpoint directly.

I have experience running several on-site DNS services such as PowerDNS, djbdns, bind, and others. Route 53 removes the need to manage the server and DNS software, allowing you to focus on the DNS content itself.