No problem, I knew what you meant. I just wanted to fish the topic out of your long email and emphasize it.
Since I’m on a plane on a Friday afternoon, and need some mindless work, I collected some references to refresh people’s memories: https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2016-April/007402.html https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2016-September/008473.html https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2017-January/009104.html https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2017-January/009105.html https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2017-January/009114.html https://cabforum.org/pipermail/validation/2016-June/000319.html Maybe on my flight on Tuesday I’ll have time to actually READ the links instead of just collecting them and posting them 😊 -Tim From: Ryan Sleevi [mailto:sle...@google.com] Sent: Friday, March 2, 2018 9:24 AM To: Tim Hollebeek <tim.holleb...@digicert.com> Cc: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@icann.org> Subject: Re: [cabfpub] [Ext] BR Authorized Ports, add 8443 For sure. Apologies if that was worded confusing - we're hugely supportive of SRVNames, but solving the technical and policy issues around them is thorny and will require technical expertise, and I think most of the technical expertise of the Forum has been otherwise occupied by a number of more pressing matters (adoption of Certificate Transparency, strengthening of validation methods, reducing certificate lifetimes, etc) On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Tim Hollebeek <tim.holleb...@digicert.com <mailto:tim.holleb...@digicert.com> > wrote: We’re willing to continue talking through those issues in an attempt to reach a solution. I do think SRVNames would be a useful improvement. For us, the lack of movement has had more to do with time constraints than technical constraints! While SRVNames do offer a way to scope the authority to a particular service (on any port), there's been no movement towards adopting them in the CA/Browser Forum, due to the issues they would have with technically constrained sub-CAs.
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list Public@cabforum.org https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public