On Jul 31, 2017, at 10:45 AM, Rich Smith via Public <public@cabforum.org> wrote: > > Hi Peter, > Overall, I like your suggestions, but could I ask that in definitions where > you refer to outside RFC definitions that you include those outside > definitions verbatim so that someone reading the BRs does not have to go > scouring through all the various RFCs? For example: > Change: > Domain Label: A “label” as defined in RFC 7719 > > To: > Domain Label: A “Label” as defined in RFC 7719: The identifier of an > individual node in the sequence of nodes identified by a fully qualified > domain name. > > This will make it much easier to parse the BRs on their own. Also, I know in > general that as a best practice simply pointing to the reference is better so > that if the reference definition changes, so would our definitions w/out > having to take further action. However in this situation, I would consider > that a bug rather than a feature. I don’t think we should allow changes to > externally referenced definition to automatically change our definitions, at > least in this case, without discussion and voting.
To (apologetically) throw a spanner into the works here: RFC 7719 is being revised, and this very definition is changing to be clearer. The current draft says: Label: An ordered list of zero or more octets and which makes up a portion of a domain name. Using graph theory, a label identifies one node in a portion of the graph of all possible domain names. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ Public mailing list Public@cabforum.org https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public