[cabfpub] ICANN, gTLD, internal names

[Chris Palmer]

The plain fact is, CAs can't have verified such names. I'm sure I
wasn't the first to raise the issue, but I got similar results from my
own SSL Observatory queries two years ago:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/04/unqualified-names-ssl-observatory

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Rick Andrews <Rick_Andrews at symantec.com> wrote:
> Didn't we convey to ICANN that this is still an issue even if CAs don't issue certificates for .corp and other new gTLDs? The language in this document seems to lay the blame on CAs.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org]
>> On Behalf Of Erwann ABALEA
>> Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 1:27 PM
>> To: public at cabforum.org
>> Subject: [cabfpub] ICANN, gTLD, internal names
>>
>> (second attempt)
>>
>> I don't think the recent request to consider ".corp" as internal (and
>> reject the gTLD application) will receive a positive answer.
>>
>> http://www.icann.org/en/groups/ssac/documents/sac-057-en.pdf
>>
>> --
>> Erwann
>> _______________________________________________
>> Public mailing list
>> Public at cabforum.org
>> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
> _______________________________________________
> Public mailing list
> Public at cabforum.org
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public