Salz, Rich <rsalz=40akamai....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > > - Some sections mention "server" while other sections does not state > anything, therefor applying to both client and server. I think the draft > needs to be very clear on this point. > > > > - I saw that there was a discussion on client certs and that some > client certs are built with CN and cannot be easily changed. Other uses of > RFC 6125 like the Service Based Architecture in 3GPP 5G makes little or no > difference between server and client when it comes to certificates. > > > > Thanks for reading it! The current plan is to produce a stand-alone > 6125bis, rather than the current diff/patch document. I’ll try to make sure > these issues are cleared up. >
I think we should avoid mentioning roles like "client" or "server" except non-normatively to emphasize that the spec would apply to both roles. What matters is that the entity's identity is a DNS name. Cheers, Brian
_______________________________________________ Uta mailing list Uta@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
