MCP Comparison · 2026
Name.com vs Porkbun MCP Server
Comparing Name.com and Porkbun as MCP servers? Name.com (manage name.com domains) is best when sandbox-first registration flows. Porkbun (manage porkbun domains and dns) is best when read-only dns inspection with no risk of a write. Both run as Model Context Protocol servers and can coexist in the same client. Updated 2026.
Side-by-side specs
Pulled from each MCP's verified fact sheet.
| Name.com | Porkbun | |
|---|---|---|
| Primary function | Manage Name.com Domains | Manage Porkbun Domains and DNS |
| Maintainer | Name.com | Community (korobkov-v) |
| Pricing | Freemium | Open source |
| Setup complexity | Low · ~5 min | Low · ~5 min |
| Transport | stdio | stdio |
| Auth model | API key | API key |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | TypeScript | TypeScript |
| Latest version | latest | latest |
| Compatible clients | Claude, Cursor, Any MCP-compatible client, Name.com accounts | Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Windsurf, Any MCP-compatible client, Porkbun accounts |
| Last verified | 2026-09-29 | 2026-09-17 |
Which one should you pick?
Decision rubric drawn from each MCP's documented strengths.
Choose Name.com
- Sandbox-first registration flows
- DNS and DNSSEC management
- Domain transfers in, with eligibility checks
Choose Porkbun
- Read-only DNS inspection with no risk of a write
- Declarative DNS (`dns_batch_apply`, `dns_upsert`)
- At-cost registration behind a double opt-in
Pick something else if…
- Operations outside Name.com's API surface
- Workflows requiring official vendor support
Feature breakdown
Key capabilities each server ships out of the box.
Name.com
- Vendor-published server (github.com/namedotcom/namecom-mcp), MIT, TypeScript
- 18 grouped tools with an `operation` parameter, verified by probe on v1.2.1
- Defaults to the test environment (mcp.dev.name.com)
- `NAME_USERNAME` + `NAME_TOKEN` auth
- Marked experimental by Name.com
Porkbun
- 40 tools verified by probe on v0.3
- Read-only by default; writes need `--get-muddy`
- Registration needs a second flag, `--enable-domain-create`
- Scenario tools default to `dry_run: true`
- MIT, npx-first, Node >= 20
Install snippets
Open the detail page for ready-to-paste config for every major client.
FAQ
Name.com vs Porkbun: which MCP server should I use?
Pick Name.com when sandbox-first registration flows. Pick Porkbun when read-only dns inspection with no risk of a write. Name.com is built for manage name.com domains, while Porkbun focuses on manage porkbun domains and dns.
Can I run both Name.com and Porkbun together?
Yes. MCP clients run each server as a separate process and surface every server's tools simultaneously, so you can install both and let your agent decide which to call. Be deliberate with auth scopes when stacking servers.
How fresh is this comparison?
Updated for 2026. Name.com's last verification: 2026-09-29. Porkbun's last verification: 2026-09-17. We refresh detail-page facts on every catalog rebuild.
More Name.com comparisons
Browse all Domains MCPs? See the full ranked list →