On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 07:15:32AM -0700, Peter Saint-Andre - &yet wrote:
> >I did not get a chance to read the text in context. Adding the target name
> >as a secondary indentifier is fine, but indeed the SNI name should not
> >change absent signalling via TLSA RRs.
>
> OK, great, then I think we're in agreement.
Yes, we are.
--
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
