Both of the cited standards are ancient and written from the perspective of network admins trying to reduce the bandwidth used by DNS back in the 90's (DNS messages usually fit within a single packet).
An actual study came out in 2002 [0, 1] showing that DNS cache hit rates follow a power-law curve, with the bend starting at ~5 minutes and leveling off ~15 minutes. You will get very marginal gains with a TTL above 1 hour. IMHO, anything past an hour is a footgun for most people.
I have to talk around an NDA here, but only big players like Google use a TTL past 24 hours. Google might care about shaving a few tens of milliseconds off of load times for a single user once a day, but you should worry more about customers not being able to load your website for a day because you screwed your DNS config.
An actual study came out in 2002 [0, 1] showing that DNS cache hit rates follow a power-law curve, with the bend starting at ~5 minutes and leveling off ~15 minutes. You will get very marginal gains with a TTL above 1 hour. IMHO, anything past an hour is a footgun for most people.
I have to talk around an NDA here, but only big players like Google use a TTL past 24 hours. Google might care about shaving a few tens of milliseconds off of load times for a single user once a day, but you should worry more about customers not being able to load your website for a day because you screwed your DNS config.
I really should submit a new RFC for TTL values.
0: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/1041066
1: http://cs.uccs.edu/~cchow/pub/master/ycai/doc/multipath/niss...