I don't really understand why you keep repeating this claim that we're arguing that there are zero technical reasons for an ISP to want to provide DNS. No one is saying that.

Perhaps you misunderstood my original topelevel comment. If that's the case, let me try to clarify: ISPs have zero technical reasons to complain that people are using alternative resolvers. I totally see why they want to provide DNS resolvers, and that makes perfect sense. Unfortunately, part of that "want" is so they can sell DNS query data to third parties, which is just another reason why I don't want to use them.

Yeah that’s what happened my bad. Anyway, see my other comment: I still don’t think simply being able to choose your resolver as a consumer is enough. We need to defend against abuse technically and socially. It really shouldn’t matter which DNS provider you do use.

> Cloudflare and Google pay ISPs for the latency they get, FWIW. If I made my own resolver service today I would not be able to compete with your ISP without forking over $$$.

I think the main reason for this is even if your competitor grew like a weed, it would be a decade or two before you had the scale to justify rolling out a CDN/caching infrastructure like that of cloudflare. That's not a matter of simply paying ISPs money.

Do peering agreements usually have money exchanged if they're already both at the same IX?