Oh, I see. All is in the wire format.

So in wire format the root itself is one octet (length=00), and since every 
label is preceded by its length expressed in one octet one shall add the 
lengths of all labels plus one octet per label (instead of only counting the 
dot, which is displayed in text format). This explains the 1 difference.
So 253 characters max.

Cordialement,
Erwann Abalea

Le 1 août 2017 à 21:02, Peter Bowen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> a 
écrit :

Given that we require entry in global DNS (e.g. no unqualified names), that the 
longest TLD is 24 characters (xn--vermgensberatung-pwb), and the longest 
allowed label is 63 characters, and in wire format each character is one octet, 
the longest allowable SAN is:

<36 characters>.<63 chars>.<63 chars>.<63 chars>.<24 chars>

which is 249 characters and four dots, for 253 total characters.  This matches 
what is described here: 
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20120412-00/?p=7873

On Aug 1, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Erwann Abalea via Public 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Bonsoir,

I personally think the new definition is clear and unambiguous; a label is 
composed of arbitrary octets, and can even be empty (which is the case for the 
root). But for the new definition to fit our purpose, we may need to also 
include a mention to the « Global DNS » (a new addition in 7719bis), which 
clarifies the label lengths, global length, common root, and other things.

One question for Paul: at Global DNS/Composition of names, it is said that a 
domain name has a max length of 255 octets in wire format, and the root 
represents one octet. Does that octet account for the leading dot, or in 
addition to the leading dot? In other words, should an FQDN expressed in a 
SAN:dNSName be limited to 254 octets, or 253 octets?

Cordialement,
Erwann Abalea

Le 1 août 2017 à 17:33, Rich Smith via Public 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :

Thanks for the info, Paul.  That new definition, at least to me, seems less 
clear for our purposes than the current one.  That really illustrates my point 
well though.  I don't think we want to tie critical definitions to an outside 
source that could be changed by groups who likely are not considering 
TLS/WebPKI domain verification in their changes.  They may well make changes 
that for their purposes clarifies things, but for our purposes has the 
potential to introduce ambiguities, or otherwise change the understood, 
accepted procedures.

-Rich

-----Original Message-----
From: Public [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Hoffman via 
Public
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 1:20 PM
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] [Ext] Ballot 202 - Underscore and Wildcard Characters

On Jul 31, 2017, at 10:45 AM, Rich Smith via Public 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 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
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public


_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

Reply via email to