[GH-ISSUE #1323] Support for SVCB/HTTPS record type #649

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-03-15 23:39:59 +03:00 by kerem · 2 comments

kerem commented

2026-03-15 23:39:59 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @tanyav2 on GitHub (Dec 17, 2020).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/hickory-dns/hickory-dns/issues/1323

trust-dns-client does not support SVCB/HTTPS record type. This is now supported by miekg/dns which is a popular Go DNS implementation.

Currently, we can use RecordType::Unknown(65) to query this record.

I'm happy to submit a PR for this implementation, if this is something that can be supported.

cc @chris-wood @lekensteyn

Originally created by @tanyav2 on GitHub (Dec 17, 2020). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/hickory-dns/hickory-dns/issues/1323 [trust-dns-client](https://docs.rs/trust-dns-client/0.19.6/trust_dns_client/rr/enum.RecordType.html) does not support [SVCB/HTTPS](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-httpssvc-03) record type. This is now supported by [miekg/dns](https://github.com/miekg/dns/pull/1067) which is a popular Go DNS implementation. Currently, we can use `RecordType::Unknown(65)` to query this record. I'm happy to submit a PR for this implementation, if this is something that can be supported. cc @chris-wood @lekensteyn

kerem

2026-03-15 23:39:59 +03:00

closed this issue
added the
enhance
label

kerem commented

2026-03-15 23:40:17 +03:00

Author

Owner

@bluejekyll commented on GitHub (Dec 18, 2020):

I haven’t looked at the RFC in detail, but please feel free to put up a PR. Notice the way that we have certain record types split across DNSSEC features to reduce dependencies, you may or may not want to have this be optional for similar reasons.

Happy to explain more if this is not obvious in the code. Thanks!

@bluejekyll commented on GitHub (Dec 18, 2020): I haven’t looked at the RFC in detail, but please feel free to put up a PR. Notice the way that we have certain record types split across DNSSEC features to reduce dependencies, you may or may not want to have this be optional for similar reasons. Happy to explain more if this is not obvious in the code. Thanks!

kerem commented

2026-03-15 23:40:22 +03:00

Author

Owner

@bluejekyll commented on GitHub (Mar 7, 2021):

@tanyav2 see #1402

@bluejekyll commented on GitHub (Mar 7, 2021): @tanyav2 see #1402

kerem referenced this issue

2026-03-16 02:14:05 +03:00

[PR #649] [MERGED] Changed log message to debug. #1579