Visual RFC.
ALL RFCs / RFC 9460
Read the RFC ↗
RFC 9460 / MECHANISMS

Choose compatible bound records

04

A low priority is useful only if the client can use the entire record.

RFC 9460 · § 8EXAMPLE
4 / 4
04
Reject a contradictory record

Separate negative record: mandatory=key65444 without key65444. It is not self-consistent. The client MUST reject the record and MAY reject the RRset.

Choose compatible bound recordsSeparate negative record: mandatory=key65444 without key65444. It is not self-consistent. The client MUST reject the record and MAY reject the RRset.Reject a contradictory recordSeparate invalid recordmandatory=key65444 · key65444 absentNot self-consistentMUST reject recordMAY reject entire RRset

Key idea: Ignore an incompatible record rather than borrowing its pieces.

Terms
Service binding
A DNS record associates a service endpoint with that endpoint’s connection parameters.
Origin
The scheme, host and port identifying the HTTP service. An alternative endpoint does not replace this identity.
ALPN
Application-Layer Protocol Negotiation: protocol identifiers used with transports such as TLS or QUIC.
RRset
Resource records with the same owner name, class and type; an unordered set.

Look up a term in the glossary ↗

Rules & examples
  • A ServiceMode RR is compatible when the client recognizes all mandatory keys and their values allow a successful connection. Ignore incompatible records; sort compatible records by ascending SvcPriority (§§3,8).
  • The mandatory key lists extra required keys. For self-consistency, listed keys MUST be present; mandatory MUST NOT list itself. Its wire list is strictly increasing with no repeats (§8).
  • Unknown non-mandatory parameters are ignored unless a protocol mapping says otherwise. HTTPS automatically requires understanding port and no-default-alpn when present; mandatory itself is always automatically mandatory (§§2.4.3,8,9).
  • Clients MUST reject a record whose recognized parameters are not self-consistent and MAY reject the whole RRset. Clients SHOULD try higher-priority alternatives first, with fallback to lower-priority alternatives. Equal-priority records SHOULD be shuffled; §§5.1–5.2 permit specified connection-reuse/incomplete-response optimizations.

Fictional names and documentation addresses. This is a bounded connection-discovery illustration, not a DNS server, TLS implementation or full deployment recipe.

Sources
Protocol participantThreat or exceptionProtocol controlSimplified drawings · precise section references
New to this? Start hereA quick picture + helpful background

Read one endpoint’s instruction card

Imagine a service offering several entrances, each with its own instructions. Keep each card intact: an entrance address and its required equipment belong together. DNS service binding works similarly, but the client must still verify the service’s identity when connecting.

Helpful first, if these ideas are unfamiliar

These pictures are analogies to help you learn. The linked RFC explains the actual rules.

Related RFCs and changes

“Updates” changes part of an earlier RFC. “Obsoletes” replaces it. This list shows selected related documents.

All chapters in RFC 9460

Drawing view

Scroll the drawing to see every part. Playback controls stay above it.

RFC 9700 / CHAPTERS

Chapters

For full details, tables, algorithms, and exceptions, read the original RFC.

RFC status and corrections ↗