DDNS-Go vs Kong Gateway

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?
FeatureDDNS-GoKong Gateway
CategoryReverse Proxy & GatewaysReverse Proxy & Gateways
LicenseMITApache-2.0
LanguageGoLua
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM64 MB512 MB
Deploymentdocker, binarydocker, kubernetes, helm
GitHub stars★ 17,177★ 43,947
First released20202015
ReplacesNo-IP, DynDNSAWS API Gateway, Apigee

Why pick each one

Choose DDNS-Go if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 17.2k GitHub stars
DDNS-Go details

Choose Kong Gateway if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
  • Mature project with 43.9k GitHub stars
Kong Gateway details

Frequently asked questions

Is DDNS-Go or Kong Gateway better?

Neither is universally better. Kong Gateway has the larger community, while DDNS-Go is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are DDNS-Go and Kong Gateway free and open-source?

Yes. DDNS-Go is licensed under MIT and Kong Gateway under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run DDNS-Go and Kong Gateway with Docker?

DDNS-Go: yes. Kong Gateway: yes.

Related comparisons