From: Jacob Hoffman-Andrews [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:17 PM To: Doug Beattie <[email protected]>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [cabfpub] CAA look up failures and retry logic
You make a good point. To reiterate the language from the BRs: > CAs are permitted to treat a record lookup failure as permission to issue if: > • the failure is outside the CA's infrastructure; > • the lookup has been retried at least once; and > • the domain's zone does not have a DNSSEC validation chain to the ICANN > root. Specifically, this talks about a single record lookup failure, but allows treating that as permission to issue. I think the behavior we'd really like here is to treat a record lookup failure as equivalent to a successful, empty response if those conditions are met. That way, for instance if a CAA lookup for "nonexistent.example.com<http://nonexistent.example.com>" returns NXDOMAIN, the CA is still required to attempt looking up a CAA record for "example.com<http://example.com>". So I agree that your "most likely" option is the ideal, and is what CAs should be implementing to be conservative, but the BRs do not currently say that. I would support a ballot to amend it. CAs might be motivated to run into fewer failures and to issue more certificates, so being conservative might not be what’s happening. I know we’re blocking many more requests than some other CAs (mutual customers have informed us), which is driving this line of questioning for clarity. - What constitutes a failure? - How are failures retried and processed? - What’s an acceptable timeout period? None of this is called out in the BRs or RFC.
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
