The code block on the srv name in the formatnetwork page is confusing
since the actual parameter is service. Moving the code block to the
service work makes it better.
---
 docs/formatnetwork.html.in | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/docs/formatnetwork.html.in b/docs/formatnetwork.html.in
index f5a48d9b92..06ac63eeb5 100644
--- a/docs/formatnetwork.html.in
+++ b/docs/formatnetwork.html.in
@@ -1035,7 +1035,7 @@
           <dd>The <code>dns</code> element can have also 0 or more <code>srv</code>
             record elements. Each <code>srv</code> record element defines a DNS SRV record
             and has 2 mandatory and 5 optional attributes. The mandatory attributes
-            are service <code>name</code> and <code>protocol</code> (tcp, udp)
+            are <code>service</code> name and <code>protocol</code> (tcp, udp)
             and the optional attributes are <code>target</code>,
             <code>port</code>, <code>priority</code>, <code>weight</code> and
             <code>domain</code> as defined in DNS server SRV RFC (RFC 2782).
-- 
2.29.2

On Mon, 2021-01-25 at 16:22 +0100, Cédric Bosdonnat wrote:
> +++ b/docs/formatnetwork.html.in
> @@ -1035,7 +1035,7 @@
>            <dd>The <code>dns</code> element can have also 0 or more <code>srv</code>
>              record elements. Each <code>srv</code> record element defines a DNS SRV record
>              and has 2 mandatory and 5 optional attributes. The mandatory attributes
> -            are service <code>name</code> and <code>protocol</code> (tcp, udp)
> +            are <code>service</code> name and <code>protocol</code> (tcp, udp)

I'd remove "name" altogether, since we're just listing a bunch of
attributes.

Reviewed-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com>

-- 
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization