*   Does it seems like it's at all reasonable, from the perspective of the 
security area and focus on PKIX (documents and tools), for an application 
profile like this to say to conform to "... RFC 5280 with the exception of the 
FQDN/IP-address restriction on URI authority part". It's not exactly an update 
to RFC 5280 but I don't know how valid or typical it is for one RFC to relax 
requirements from a normative reference.

How would that work?  Let’s take an application using OpenSSL.  It currently 
calls d2i_X509() to parse the DER into internal format. It does various cert 
checks along the way. Would you add a new API (because you can’t change the 
calling sequence it breaks all existing applications), and then pass that flag 
down through all the call stack?

_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme

Reply via email to