[cabfpub] Proposal for change of definition of Internal Server Name in the BRs
Rich Smith
richard.smith at comodo.com
Tue Dec 17 19:58:05 UTC 2013
So it is. Sorry missed that on first scan through.
From: Jeremy Rowley [mailto:jeremy.rowley at digicert.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 2:52 PM
To: richard.smith at comodo.com; kirk_hall at trendmicro.com; 'Gervase Markham';
'Ryan Sleevi'
Cc: 'CABFPub'
Subject: RE: [cabfpub] Proposal for change of definition of Internal Server
Name in the BRs
That is defined as a Reserved IP address under the BRs and is dealt with under
Section 9.2.1.
From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On
Behalf Of Rich Smith
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 12:46 PM
To: kirk_hall at trendmicro.com; 'Gervase Markham'; 'Ryan Sleevi'
Cc: 'CABFPub'
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Proposal for change of definition of Internal Server
Name in the BRs
Just one thing to add.
Internal Server Name: A Server Name that is an Unregistered Domain Name, or an
IP address included in the three blocks reserved by IANA for private internets
as defined in RFC1918.
From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On
Behalf Of kirk_hall at trendmicro.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 12:25 PM
To: Gervase Markham; Ryan Sleevi
Cc: CABFPub (public at cabforum.org)
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Proposal for change of definition of Internal Server
Name in the BRs
So would it work to amend the definition of ISN and of Registered Domain Name
to read as follows?
Internal Server Name: A Server Name that is an Unregistered Domain Name.
Registered Domain Name: A Domain Name that has been registered with an
ICANN-assigned Domain Name Registrar.
[Unregistered Domain Name: A Domain Name that is not a Registered Domain
Name.]
-----Original Message-----
From: Gervase Markham [mailto:gerv at mozilla.org]
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 4:28 AM
To: Ryan Sleevi; Kirk Hall (RD-US)
Cc: CABFPub (public at cabforum.org)
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Proposal for change of definition of Internal Server
Name in the BRs
On 17/12/13 02:02, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> Within Chromium's implementation, we've long interpreted Internal
> Server Name exactly as you describe, and that has been our primary
> concern with the deprecation of such names.
>
> The one caveat I would propose that, as we seek to improve wording, we
> also ensure that the name that has been registered with a Domain Name
> Registar authorized by the ICANN-assigned Registry for that domain
> name space.
This sounds good to me, with Ryan's caveat taken note of. The alternate domain
names space has multiple competing instances of the same TLD, and they will no
doubt clash with the new ICANN ones. I think we have to be ICANN-only.
Gerv
TREND MICRO EMAIL NOTICE
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential
and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or
disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or
telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20131217/a74f1af2/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 6391 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20131217/a74f1af2/attachment-0003.bin>
More information about the Public
mailing list