CoreDNS vs SmartDNS

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted reverse proxy & gateways options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeatureCoreDNSSmartDNS
CategoryReverse Proxy & GatewaysReverse Proxy & Gateways
LicenseApache-2.0GPL-3.0
LanguageGoC
Setup difficultyMediumMedium
Min. RAM128 MB64 MB
Deploymentbinary, docker, kubernetesbinary, source
GitHub stars★ 14,229★ 11,183
First released20162018
ReplacesBIND, dnsmasqPi-hole, dnsmasq

Why pick each one

Choose CoreDNS if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
  • Mature project with 14.2k GitHub stars
CoreDNS details

Choose SmartDNS if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Mature project with 11.2k GitHub stars
  • Written in C
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
SmartDNS details

Frequently asked questions

Is CoreDNS or SmartDNS better?

Neither is universally better. CoreDNS has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are CoreDNS and SmartDNS free and open-source?

Yes. CoreDNS is licensed under Apache-2.0 and SmartDNS under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run CoreDNS and SmartDNS with Docker?

CoreDNS: yes. SmartDNS: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons