[cabfpub] ICANN, gTLD, internal names

Rick Andrews Rick_Andrews at symantec.com
Fri Mar 15 21:30:57 UTC 2013

Maybe I wasn’t clear. Even if we CAs stop this practice today and revoke all existing certs, but enterprises continue to use .corp or other new gTLDs in their internal DNS, those enterprises will have massive problems. They will not be able to rout any traffic to a public .corp address. Isn’t that right?


From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.)
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 2:27 PM
To: public at cabforum.org
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] ICANN, gTLD, internal names

On 03/15/2013 10:27 PM, From Erwann ABALEA:

I don't think the recent request to consider ".corp" as internal (and

reject the gTLD application) will receive a positive answer.

They however closely use the same argumentation I've been using during all discussions for the last few years including those preceding the BR. And I'm not surprised really - when certificate authorities confirm something that it hasn't verified and isn't able to verify, it failed in its very basic tasks.

We are on the right track with phasing them out and ICANN apparently is willing to work with the CAB Forum, but my recommendation is to stop this practice as soon as possible voluntarily.



Eddy Nigg, COO/CTO

StartCom Ltd.<http://www.startcom.org>


startcom at startcom.org<xmpp:startcom at startcom.org>


Join the Revolution!<http://blog.startcom.org>


Follow Me<http://twitter.com/eddy_nigg>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20130315/11570e72/attachment-0003.html>

More information about the Public mailing list