Skip to content

Conversation

@stephanoodle
Copy link
Contributor

Summary

This PR adds comprehensive documentation for Service Binding Records (SVCB and HTTPS) as specified in RFC 9460.

Changes

  • New articles:

    • service-binding-records.md - Combined explanation article for SVCB and HTTPS records
    • manage-service-binding-records.md - Combined managing guide for both record types
  • Updated articles:

    • dns-glossary.md - Added SVCB and HTTPS entries
    • supported-dns-records.md - Added SVCB (type 64) and HTTPS (type 65) to supported records list
    • categories/dns.yaml - Added new articles to categories

Key Points

  • SVCB and HTTPS are functionally identical record types from RFC 9460
  • They differ only in naming format: HTTPS uses domain.name while SVCB uses _service._protocol.domain.name
  • Both support AliasMode (priority 0) and ServiceMode (priority > 0)
  • Documentation includes guidance on zone structures with more than 8 aliases (DNAME recommendation)

Documentation Structure

Following DNSimple's documentation patterns:

  • Explanation article follows "What Are..." naming convention
  • Managing guide covers adding, updating, and removing for both record types
  • Both articles cross-reference each other appropriately

Ready for review.

- Add concept article explaining TLSA records and DANE protocol
- Add how-to guide for managing TLSA records
- Add reference guide for TLSA record format and components
- Add TLSA to supported DNS records list (type 52)
- Add TLSA entry to DNS glossary
- Update DNS category navigation and main DNS documentation page
- Follow diataxis framework and APA style guidelines
Replace <note> tags with GitHub's [!NOTE] callout format
TLSA records require DNSSEC to provide security benefits. Add important callout to inform users they must enable DNSSEC before using TLSA records.
- Add combined explanation article for SVCB and HTTPS records (RFC 9460)
- Add combined managing guide for both record types
- Update DNS glossary with SVCB and HTTPS entries
- Update supported DNS records list
- Update categories to include new articles

SVCB and HTTPS are functionally identical record types that differ only
in naming format. HTTPS uses simpler naming (domain.name) for HTTP/HTTPS
services, while SVCB requires explicit service/protocol specification
(_service._protocol.domain.name) for any service type.
@stephanoodle stephanoodle self-assigned this Jan 23, 2026
stephanoodle and others added 4 commits January 23, 2026 15:10
…s.md

- Add links for HINFO, NAPTR, PTR, SSHFP, DS, and DNSKEY records
- All record types in the supported records list now link to their documentation articles
- Add explanation article to 'What is DNS?' section
- Add managing guide to 'How to manage DNS' section
- Clarify account settings navigation in Domain Access Control article
- Update Label domains button description to clarify when it appears
- Add clear navigation steps for Integrated Domain Providers

Verified against dnsimple-app codebase.
- Add 'Differences Between HTTPS and URL Records' article
- Add 'Differences Between HTTPS and ALIAS Records' article
- Add both articles to categories/dns.yaml
- Add both articles to DNS pillar page explanation section

These articles help users understand when to use HTTPS records
versus URL records (service binding vs redirects) and HTTPS records
versus ALIAS records (service binding vs hostname resolution).
… articles

- Add links to CNAME, A, AAAA, MX, and TXT records throughout articles
- Add Related articles sections to comparison articles
- Add cross-references between explanation, managing, and comparison articles
- Ensure all DNS record types mentioned in text are linked to their articles
@stephanoodle stephanoodle added the documentation Updates on the documentation and support content. label Jan 26, 2026
@stephanoodle stephanoodle marked this pull request as ready for review January 27, 2026 18:28
Copy link
Member

@dallasread dallasread left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That's a lot of content – it's looking good to me. 😅

Copy link
Contributor

@lokst lokst left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks great!

- Add new article explaining SVCB and HTTPS records (RFC 9460)
- Document Record Editor features (simple/advanced modes, validation, live preview, API support)
- Update supported-dns-records.md to include SVCB/HTTPS
- Add SVCB/HTTPS to Route 53 and CoreDNS supported record types
- Note Azure DNS does not support SVCB/HTTPS records
- Update record editor documentation to mention SVCB/HTTPS
- Add SVCB/HTTPS to DNS category navigation and main DNS article
…vice binding records article

- Add Record Editor features section (simple/advanced modes, validation, live preview, API support)
- Add Integrated DNS Provider support section (Route 53, CoreDNS support; Azure DNS limitations)
- Remove duplicate svcb-https-record.md article
Copy link
Member

@dallasread dallasread left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks great – nice one! 😎 I made a few comments on things I noticed.

Added a "What is a service binding?" section to the article. It:

Defines a service binding as the association between a domain name and the configuration information needed to access a network service

Explains the problem it solves (clients needing multiple connection attempts or additional lookups)

Lists the capabilities service bindings enable (service discovery, protocol negotiation, connection optimization, domain aliasing)
needed to add 
    Managing Service Binding Records (SVCB and HTTPS)
    What Are Service Binding Records (SVCB and HTTPS)?
@dallasread dallasread mentioned this pull request Feb 9, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

documentation Updates on the documentation and support content.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants