On 1/29/23 1:14 PM, Salz, Rich wrote:
It seems to me that It remains the case that this I-D is not the best
forum to litigate which U-labels are valid candidates for turning into
A-labels. Surely that belongs elsewhere.
I agree that this kind of thing belongs in the DNS groups.
However it is that
applications (or their libraries) turn U-labels into A-labels, this I-D
describes how to match them against presented identifiers in
certificates.
*EXACTLY*
Really all this draft says is "compare A labels."
What else do we need to say? In my view nothing.
Completely agree.
And that's what draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis (even RFC 6125 before it) has
always done, with version -10 now including additional security
considerations and pointers to relevant specifications.
Chairs, can you please initiate a consensus call on whether or not we
need to make changes to draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis on this topic? As far
as I can see, we have one person loudly in the rough, but a consensus
call would enable us to determine whether there is broader support for
modifications to the draft (which, I would like to point out, has
already completed two working group last calls).
Peter
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
Uta@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
