head to head · open source

kong vs octodns

kong has 44,147 GitHub stars, 5,210 forks, 200 open issues and last shipped 11 days ago. octodns has 3,759 stars, 442 forks, 3 open issues and last shipped 9 days ago. kong leads on adoption by 1,074% (44,147 vs 3,759 stars). kong is written in Lua under Apache-2.0; octodns is written in Python under MIT. kong has attracted 12% as many forks as stars, octodns 12%. octodns was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

kong ★ 44K octodns ★ 3.8K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

kong octodns
GitHub stars ★ 44K ★ 3.8K
License Apache-2.0 MIT
Written in Lua Python
Last push 2026-09-07 2026-09-09
Forks ⑂ 5.2K ⑂ 442
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick kong if

  • You weight community size — 44K stars and counting
  • You want the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Lua
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full kong profile →

pick octodns if

  • You want the octodns feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You evaluated both and octodns fits your workflow better

full octodns profile →

About kong

Kong (also known as Kong Gateway) is an open source, cloud native, platform agnostic API, LLM, and MCP gateway, licensed under Apache 2.0, built for platform, DevOps, and AI engineering teams that need a single high performance layer to route, secure, and observe both conventional API traffic and agentic LLM traffic.

read the full kong overview →

About octodns

octoDNS is a Python tool for managing DNS records across multiple providers. It applies an infrastructure as code pattern to DNS, so record definitions can be stored in a repository, reviewed, and deployed through the same workflow used for other code. The project sits in the Infrastructure & Operations / Cloud Infrastructure Management category.

read the full octodns overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

Immich ★ 114K Uptime Kuma ★ 91K worldmonitor ★ 87K mall ★ 85K NetData ★ 81K Elasticsearch ★ 78K

Related comparisons

kong vs trivy kong vs opentofu kong vs jenkins kong vs pulumi kong vs floci kong vs argo-cd kong vs sops trivy vs opentofu uptime-kuma vs worldmonitor uptime-kuma vs netdata uptime-kuma vs grafana worldmonitor vs netdata worldmonitor vs grafana netdata vs grafana uptime-kuma vs huginn worldmonitor vs huginn immich vs paperless-ngx immich vs ceph immich vs filestash immich vs garage immich vs storj immich vs alarik immich vs spinifex paperless-ngx vs ceph

More Cloud Infrastructure Management projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Cloud Infrastructure Management field.

kong vs trivy kong vs OpenTofu kong vs jenkins kong vs Pulumi kong vs floci kong vs argo-cd kong vs sops kong vs wtf kong vs dagger kong vs task kong vs aws-cdk kong vs infracost

Frequently asked questions

Is kong or octodns more popular?

kong has 44,147 GitHub stars and octodns has 3,759. kong has the larger community by that measure.

Are kong and octodns free?

Both are open source. kong is licensed under Apache-2.0 and octodns under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between kong and octodns?

kong is written in Lua and octodns in Python. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, kong or octodns?

Choose kong if you want the larger community (44,147 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose octodns if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.