Yes, that was exactly my point. That's why I was saying this is really an
implementation detail (albeit one you'd want to call out); the only
fundamental protocol question at issue is whether we should consider valid
a policy that matches only the cert but not the hostname itself.
On Mon, May 7, 2
Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-uta-mta-sts-17: 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 ht
> On May 7, 2018, at 4:15 AM, Daniel Margolis wrote:
>
> Yes, that was exactly my point. That's why I was saying this is really an
> implementation detail (albeit one you'd want to call out); the only
> fundamental protocol question at issue is whether we should consider valid a
> policy tha
