I had this issue with cloudns and a single record with an IPv4 and IPv6 address. They only allowed one free ddns record which covered exactly one protocol. On top of that, they added records to resolve unknown names for advertising purposes.

I get that it costs money to run a DNS service but it seems like it should be a lot cheaper at scale than a lot of companies are providing.

> On top of that, they added records to resolve unknown names for advertising purposes.

doubt

> support told me that for my usecase I should just use CloudFlare

Not true. When users ask for multiple domains under .dedyn.io, we send them the following text:

> Unfortunately, deSEC accounts are limited to 1 .dedyn.io domain. > > However, you can create additional subdomains under your existing domain, by creating a record in our web interface and putting the subdomain name into the "subname" field. For example, if you have domain.dedyn.io, and you create a record with "subname: internal", then the record will apply to internal.domain.dedyn.io. > > You can also purchase another domain elsewhere, and then bring it to deSEC for DNS hosting. Please let me know if you would like to go that route. > > Does that help?

(Disclosure: I'm CTO at deSEC.)

Similar story: asked for an increase and got told

> […] our mission is to improve Internet security by increasing the adoption of DNSSEC. [We therefore expect users to enable DNSSEC for their domains.

> Would you be willing to do that?

Wanting to increase the adoption of DNSSEC is fair, but couldn’t this be all self-serve? It’s almost as if they don’t want people to use them.

They've actually just done that, your limit automatically gets increased if all your domains are secured.

That’s good to know! I was actually very excited when I first found them; I was surprised that there aren’t many free/open public DNS hosting services.