Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-acme-subdomains-06: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-subdomains/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi, Thanks for this document. One minor nit on the definition of subdomain and ancestor domain: Subdomain has been clarified in this document to remove the ambiguity of whether a given domain is a subdomain of itself. However, looking at the definition of ancestor domain: * Ancestor Domain: a domain is an ancestor domain of a subdomain if it contains that subdomain, as per the [RFC8499] definition of subdomain. For example, for the host name "nnn.mmm.example.com", both "mmm.example.com" and "example.com" are ancestor domains of "nnn.mmm.example.com". Note that the comparisons here are done on whole labels; that is, "oo.example.com" is not an ancestor domain of "ooo.example.com" It specifically references the RFC8499 definition of subdomain rather than the one clarified in the document, raising the question whether a domain is also an ancestor of itself, and whether that ambiguity is intentional for some reason. Hence, I would propose that the definition of ancestor domain is tied back to the definition of subdomain in this document rather than RFC8499. Regards, Rob _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
