• DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Misleading statement. It doesn’t block “traffic”, it blocks DNS requests… you don’t know how much traffic this corresponds to.

      • xavier666@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Correct. The payload of DNS requests is tiny compared to, say requesting a webpage. So there might not be a huge decrease of bandwidth usage reduction. However, having 66.6% less DNS requests is still a win. The router/gateway doesn’t have to work that hard because of the dropped requests.

        • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 hours ago

          It isn’t so much about the payload of the DNS requests, but about the content that would have been loaded if the DNS request hadn’t been blocked.

          If you load a page that has 100kB of useful information, but 1MB of banner ads and trackers … you’ve blocked a lot more than 66%. But if you block 1MB of banner ads on a page that hosts a 200MB video, you’ve blocked a lot less.

          Also a 66% blocked percentage seems very high. I have installed pihole on 2 networks, and I’m seeing 1.7% on my own network, but I do run uBlock on almost everything which catches most stuff before it reaches the pihole, and 25% on the other network.