[cabfpub] Domain Validation Revision

[Gervase Markham]

On 16/02/15 21:57, kirk_hall at trendmicro.com wrote:
> Gerv -- we always allowed attorney letters in the past. 
> 
> For DV/OV, it was an "any other method" means of domain confirmation. 

Who has used this method? Perhaps they could explain how they feel that
this provides the "same level of assurance"? What expertise does an
attorney have in determining actual domain control?

> For EV, it was explicitly allowed under the EVGL (and there are still
> references to it in the template Attorney Letter attached to the EVGL),
> but /_by mistake_/ we deleted the reference when we changed EVGL 11.7
> simply to a cross reference to BR 11.1.1 – we accidentally dropped the
> old reference to using attorney-accountant letters for EV domain
> confirmation (I can give you a version number reference to the old EVGL
> if you want to confirm). 

That would be useful, please.

> This is useful when the Domain Name Registrant has licensed the domain
> to the Customer, or when the parent-sub relationship is not reported
> correctly, etc.

If they've licensed the domain to the customer, then surely the customer
can demonstrate control in any of the normal ways? If they can't, then
they don't actually have control of it, do they?

Gerv