Continuing the discussion from How is a NextDNS account private?:
We could probably split our recommendations between:
and
The latter 3 with their account-based controls are kind of an entirely separate type of service compared to the first three, they’re more like a cloud-hosted Pi-hole, and we should probably explain that distinction more clearly.
This is also kind of related to the problem this person had:
Drafted:
Just to make it more confusing, doesn’t AdGuard have public DNS where you don’t need an account. They are something in the middle. I agree though, distinguishing from DNS providers where you need account is a good call.
Yes I found out about that after posting. I think AdGuard DNS changed their homepage since we originally listed it. The proposed changes in the PR are actually going to be:
Public Providers:
Filtering Services:
(so Control D and AdGuard will be listed twice, but in the first section we’ll be linking specifically to their public offerings and also adding the “Free DNS” text to the table to make it especially clear)
One last thing that might be helpful. Mullvad doesn’t have any public plain text DNS servers, maybe stating that in the listed DNS providers might be helpful for some.
For Example
I know its stated in the bigger table but not sure if splitting it from the free plain text servers would be useful.
I do think that a dedicated article for the configurable DNS services + the self-hostable services would be nice (e.g. NextDNS, Adguard Private DNS, ControlD, Adguard Home, and Pi-hole)
I suppose the argument for splitting them, would be that people interested in one of the above services are seeking more than just a DNS server, we are drawn to these options because we want (1 )control and flexibility, and (2) insight/data/analytics/logs, so in a way these services address a different and broader set of needs than a standard DNS server.
I suppose the argument against, is that it fragments the DNS server recommendations, and might be a bit messy to disentangle (For instance a single company, Adguard, has a standard public DNS, a private DNS service similar to NextDNS, and a self-hostable solution similar to Pi-Hole)k
If it were me, I think I would either write one article, but make it clear that there are two distinct sub-categories, or separate it into two difference categories.
Why WeDNS from WeVpn company and Rethink DNS are not recommended?
Seems that WeVPN has shut down and moved users to Windscribe. Control D is owned by Windscribe so we basicly already have that recommendation.
RethinkDNS is recommended under the proxies section. I believe this current discussion is about sorting out the non-proxy DNS providers.
Two times same Link
Thanks, fixed links.
3 posts were split to a new topic: AdGuard Cloud DNS