<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/1/2018 10:15 πμ, Ryan Sleevi
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CACvaWvbq+sZYApK-QH67qX2dYaAnwtPCxBW5cWPvLir1pLBDFg@mail.gmail.com">
      <div dir="ltr"><br>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 2:45 AM,
            Dimitris Zacharopoulos via Public <span dir="ltr"><<a
                href="mailto:public@cabforum.org" target="_blank"
                moz-do-not-send="true">public@cabforum.org</a>></span>
            wrote:<br>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
              .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><span class="">
                  <div class="m_5568994031566043988moz-cite-prefix">On
                    5/1/2018 6:31 μμ, Rich Smith wrote:<br>
                  </div>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div class="m_5568994031566043988WordSection1">
                      <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
                            style="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
                          style="color:windowtext"> Public [<a
                            class="m_5568994031566043988moz-txt-link-freetext"
                            href="mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org"
                            target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:public-bounces@<wbr>cabforum.org</a>]
                          <b>On Behalf Of </b>Dimitris Zacharopoulos
                          via Public<br>
                          <b>Sent:</b> Friday, January 5, 2018 5:44 AM<br>
                          <br>
                        </span></p>
                      <p><span style="color:windowtext"><snip></span></p>
                      <p>--- BEGIN updated language for 3.2.2.4.1 ---</p>
                      <p>Confirming the Applicant's control over the
                        FQDN by validating the Applicant is the Domain
                        Contact directly with the Domain Name Registrar.
                        This method may only be used if:</p>
                      <ol start="1" type="1">
                        <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0in">The
                          CA validates Domain Contact information
                          obtained from the Domain Registrar by using
                          the process described in section 3.2.2.4.2 OR
                          3.2.2.4.3; OR</li>
                        <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0in">The
                          CA is also the Domain Name Registrar, or an
                          Affiliate of the Registrar, of the Base Domain
                          Name.</li>
                      </ol>
                      <p class="MsoNormal">Note: Once the FQDN has been
                        validated using this method, the CA MAY also
                        issue Certificates for other FQDNs that end with
                        all the labels of the validated FQDN. This
                        method is suitable for validating Wildcard
                        Domain Names.<br>
                        <br>
                        --- END updated language for 3.2.2.4.1 ---<br>
                        <br>
                        </snip></p>
                      <p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
                      <p class="MsoNormal">I think your #1 is redundant
                        as those methods already stipulate obtaining
                        information from the registrar.  </p>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                  <br>
                </span> Perhaps my reading is too strict but methods in
                3.2.2.4.2 and 3.2.2.4.3 imply that you get information
                for Domain Contact without necessarily *contacting* the
                Domain Registrar. My understanding is that you can use
                Domain Registrant contact information by whatever public
                information is available (via WHOIS). <br>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>I'm not sure I understand the distinction being made
              here between WHOIS and contacting the registrar. For
              example, the .com WHOIS implementation involves contacting
              the registrar's WHOIS services (while, conversely, .org's
              WHOIS involves effectively contacting the registry's
              WHOIS). However, see the points below to see if they are
              able to slice through that confusion.</div>
            <div> </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Thanks Ryan, this is the distinction I had in mind. My understanding
    is that using the publicly available WHOIS is not "contacting" the
    Registrar. I believed that "contacting" is an out-of-band way.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CACvaWvbq+sZYApK-QH67qX2dYaAnwtPCxBW5cWPvLir1pLBDFg@mail.gmail.com">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
              .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <br>
                Here is the Domain Contact definition in 1.6.1:<br>
                "<strong>Domain Contact</strong>: The Domain Name
                Registrant, technical contact, or administrative
                contract (or the equivalent under a ccTLD) as listed in
                the WHOIS record of the Base Domain Name or in a DNS SOA
                record"<br>
                <br>
                The only method that currently mentions that the CA may
                contact the Domain Name Registrar *directly*, is
                3.2.2.4.1. I don't think getting publicly available
                WHOIS information means "contacting" the Domain
                Registrar. This is necessary for registries that don't
                provide public WHOIS information about Domain
                Registrants.</div>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>So to make sure I understand your view: For situations
              such as ccTLDs (which are not bound by ICANN's registry
              agreements as they predate ICANN and are separately
              managed from ICANN), where WHOIS is not available, your
              view is 3.2.2.4.1 is the only method that allows for
              out-of-band contact with the registrar (which is
              contracted with the registry) in order to determine the
              Registrant/technical contact/administrative
              contact/equivalent.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Correct.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CACvaWvbq+sZYApK-QH67qX2dYaAnwtPCxBW5cWPvLir1pLBDFg@mail.gmail.com">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <div>An example of pre-existing TLD adhering to this is .gov
              (in the US) - and I'm guessing you know of one or more
              ccTLDs that also fit into this category?</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>The advantage being is that this permits non-gTLDs
              (i.e. those within the ICANN sphere of oversight) to use
              methods 'equivalent' to WHOIS. The disadvantage is that,
              in the absence of the registry agreements, the level of
              assurance or equivalence of those respective methods is at
              the determination of the ccTLD/TLD operator and the CA,
              and not uniform in assurance or reliability.</div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    The level of assurance for Domain Contact phone numbers and e-mail
    addresses is pretty much the same in most gTLD, ccTLD cases, that's
    why I proposed that they are combined with methods 3.2.2.4.2 or
    3.2.2.4.3. I am hoping to have the WHOIS "equivalent" methods for
    all Domains. We are talking about Domain Validation methods so I
    don't think we should use "Organization Information" of WHOIS or
    Domain Registrar records to validate Domain ownership. <br>
    <br>
    <br>
    Dimitris.<br>
  </body>
</html>