Hi, 

(speaking as a technical contributor)

> [Joe] OK, thanks.  Here is a revision of the text.  It probably
still
> needs some work, but hopefully it is in the right direction. 
> 
> "Implementations MUST support certification path validation
[RFC5280].
> In addition they MUST support specifying the authorized peers using 
> locally configured host names and matching the name against the 
> certificate as follows:
> 
> Implementations MUST support matching the locally configured host
name
> against a dNSName in the subjectAltName extension field and SHOULD
> support checking the name against the common name portion of the
> subject distinguished name. 
> 
> If the locally configured name is an internationalized domain name,
> conforming implementations MUST convert it to the ASCII Compatible
> Encoding (ACE) format as specified in Section 7 of RFC 5280.

Do we need to be clear about when (i.e. for what usages) this
translation needs to be done? Is this necessary before string
comparisons, for example?

> 
> The '*' (ASCII 42) wildcard character is allowed in the dNSName of
the
> subjectAltName extension (and in common name, if used to store the 
> host name), and then only as the left-most (least significant) DNS 
> label in that value.  This wildcard matches any left-most DNS label 
> in the server name.  That is, the subject *.example.com matches the 
> server names a.example.com and b.example.com, but does not match 
> example.com or a.b.example.com. Implementations MUST support
wildcards
> in certificates as specified above, but MAY provide a configuration 
> option to disable them.

shouldn't we make the ability to disable wildcards a MUST-implement,
so we can be sure the strong-security option will be available if an
operator wants to disable them for security reasons? That would seem
to be consistent with BCP61.

David Harrington
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog

Reply via email to