# Order of upstream DNS servers

**URL:** https://discourse.pi-hole.net/t/order-of-upstream-dns-servers/1915
**Category:** General
**Created:** [February 26, 2017, 12:39pm UTC](https://discourse.pi-hole.net/t/order-of-upstream-dns-servers/1915 "2017-02-26T12:39:22Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![DL6ER](https://discourse-cdn.pi-hole.net/user_avatar/discourse.pi-hole.net/dl6er/32/281_2.png) [@DL6ER](https://discourse.pi-hole.net/u/DL6ER)
#### Post date: [February 26, 2017, 5:10pm UTC](https://discourse.pi-hole.net/t/order-of-upstream-dns-servers/1915/3 "2017-02-26T17:10:42Z")

</div>

I agree with what @jpgpi250 said. The idea that one DNS server might be in favor of another most often originates from the phrases "primary" and "secondary" DNS servers, but this is _very_ misleading. I advice to read e.g. my post here

> [@Primary vs. Secondary DNS](https://discourse.pi-hole.net/t/primary-vs-secondary-dns/1536/2):
>
> Following the regulations, there is nothing like a primary and secondary DNS server. These indications are quite misleading but many systems adopted it this way. We only list the DNS servers as primary and secondary, because this is what the providers write on their pages. The bad phrasing is supported especially by how Windows handles it. If you look at any Linux distribution, there is usually no separation between primary and secondary, but you can only provide a comma-separated list of DNS se…

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.pi-hole.net/t/order-of-upstream-dns-servers/1915)._