Why do browsers not use SRV records?

Question

Why do browsers not use SRV records?

It seems like a minimal amount of work and it will make the server-side implementation of reliable websites much simpler.

<

Answer 1

Because:

1. The current HTTP RFC does not specify a symbolic service name for use in SRV records and does not specify that SRV records should be used (cf. RFC 2782, Applicability Statement).
2. It may negatively impact the latency in browsers and browser vendors want to first see it standardized for http by the IETF (cf. chromium bug report)
3. It may be kind of complex to integrate it into existing browsers (cf. firefox bug report)
4. Vendors don't want to say why (cf. webkit bug report)

The latest draft for adding SRV records to HTTP is andrews-http-srv-02 from 2014 which includes security and transitional considerations. It is more complete than the jennings-http-srv-05 draft from 2009. For example, it specifies a security relevant algorithm for choosing the port when it is given in the URL and there is a SRV record (which also includes a port field) - where the jennings draft does not look into this issue.