[cabfpub] Ballot 112 - Replace Definition of "Internal Server Name" with "Internal Name"
gerv at mozilla.org
Fri Mar 21 10:43:22 MST 2014
On 21/03/14 15:05, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> The clause regarding revocation still remains unchanged. That is, the
> event for revocation is still triggered by ICANN contracting a domain,
> which is why I was not bothered by the change and willing to endorse.
OK. My mistake was assumin that 11.1.4 actually used the definition of
Internal Server Name in the way I thought, but it doesn't.
> I think we're approaching the problem from different angles, but with
> the same goal. I prefer the current language because 11.1.4 covers the
> transition period of contracted-but-not-delegated and revocation, and
> the proposed modification above ensures that it is only names in the
> public namespace that are eligible for "split-horizon" considerations.
Yes. I'm now happy with the current wording.
More information about the Public