[cabfpub] Ballot 184 - SRVnames

Ryan Sleevi sleevi at google.com
Wed Nov 15 19:59:47 UTC 2017

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Gervase Markham <gerv at mozilla.org> wrote:

> On 15/11/17 11:34, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> > Another option is to introduce some further signal to indicate that
> > 'this' SRVName is safe to trust. This was the proposal I sketched out
> > for you.
> Yes, I understand. How is that proposal to be progressed?

I believe several members had, at one time or another, written more
formalized proposals or explored the space. I believe Phillip Hallam-Baker,
formerly of Comodo (the CA), and now, as I understand it, part of Comodo
Group, which has applied for membership as a browser following selling off
their CA arm to an investment group, had written up something more formal
in the past.

The IETF's LAMPS WG ( https://tools.ietf.org/wg/lamps/ ) would be the
recommended standards-defining-organization.

What would it take? Investment/time commitment from members of the Forum to
engage within the IETF (and its IPR policy regarding contributions), and
help develop an interoperable solution that addresses concerns both on the
CA and client side.

I know we'd be more than happy to engage in supporting and reviewing such
efforts :)

An alternative solution - though one I'd discourage - would be to
standardize simply within the CA/Browser Forum, as we did with the Onion
extension for EV certificates. Unfortunately, that limits the ability for
public/broad participation (and this concern is not solely limited to the
CA/B Forum, unlike the EV issuance practice), hence why I'd discourage it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20171115/2856e635/attachment-0003.html>

More information about the Public mailing list