On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 05:36:24PM +0200, nudge wrote:
> Tiny nits:
>
> Section 5.1 - Paragraph 4:
>
> (i.e., the[y] may ignore
> the client's SNI message)
>
> Section 8.2 - Paragraph 1:
>
> A more complex [?] involves switching to a trust-anchor or PKIX usage
> from a chain that is either self-signed, or issued by a private CA
> and thus not compatible with PKIX.
Thanks fixed in -11. This example also needed to be simplified a bit.
--
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
