[cabfpub] streetAddress

[Geoff Keating]

> On 17 May 2017, at 11:25 pm, Adriano Santoni <adriano.santoni at staff.aruba.it> wrote:
> 
> Here is an example:       (please note: it's a fake one, generated via an on-line fake address generator)
> 
> O=ACME SA
> STREET=38, Place Charles de Gaulle, 76600 Le Havre, France
> L=Le Havre
> ST=Seine-Maritime
> C=FR
> 
> In the above example, streetAddress not only contains a street name and house number, but other info as well, including the locality (already specified in the separate localityName attribute) and the country (already specified in the separate countryName attribute), and a postal code that should probably be moved elsewhere (e.g. in the specific postalCode attribute, if used).
> 
> It is quite obvious, in the above example, that the address information are consistent, overall. The question I am asking is: is this way of populating streetAddress okay, from a compliance point of view?
> 
> Does anybody think that such a certificate should be regarded as non-conformant to the BRs ?

It’s not ‘non-conformant’, exactly; the word I would use is ‘wrong’.  It means something but it does not mean what the author thinks it means.

The above corresponds to an address that might look like this when placed on an envelope:

ACME SA
38, Place Charles De Gaulle, 76600 Le Havre, France
Le Havre, Seine-Maritime
FRANCE

Probably the envelope will be delivered, but it’ll be rejected by auto-sorting machines and require manual processing.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170518/8abb807a/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3321 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170518/8abb807a/attachment-0001.p7s>