Support setting API Gateway domain name
See original GitHub issueThis is a Feature Proposal
Description
AWS have just added support for defining custom domains via CloudFormation. It would be brilliant if we could define one for the API Gateway resource that Serverless deploys.
provider:
aws:
apiGateway:
customDomain: <custom domain>
certificateArn: <arn of cert from ACM>
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 6 years ago
- Reactions:7
- Comments:10 (7 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Setting up custom domain names for REST APIs
When you create a custom domain name for a Regional API, API Gateway creates a Regional domain name for the API. You must...
Read more >Adding a Custom Domain to AWS API Gateway
Next step in our adventure is to configure the custom domain in API Gateway. In the API Gateway console, you have the option...
Read more >How to setup a custom domain name with AWS API Gateway
Step 1 — Disable the default endpoint · Step 2 — Request a certificate for the domain · Step 3 — Add a...
Read more >Setting up a regional custom domain name in API Gateway
Set up a regional custom domain name with an ACM certificate using the API Gateway console · Choose a custom domain name. ·...
Read more >How to Define a Custom Domain Name to API Gateway ...
API Gateway custom domain name provides a simple and intuitive URL for your API users that they can then use to interact directly...
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Thanks for the feedback on this @hassankhan and thanks @horike37 for looking it up in the docs 👍
I’d say we just start with one domain and extend it later on (if there’s demand for such a functionality). This will keep the initial implementation lean and won’t over-complicate things.
BTW. We should also keep this upcoming change in mind while working on an implementation proposal: https://github.com/serverless/serverless/pull/3878.
I’m happy with that, makes the most sense 👍