Re: [Acme] AD Review: draft-ietf-acme-star-delegation-04

[Roman Danyliw <[e-mail]>]

Hi Thomas!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Fossati <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, March 8, 2021 8:13 AM
> To: Roman Danyliw <[e-mail]>; Yaron Sheffer <[e-mail]>;
> IETF ACME <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Thomas Fossati <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [Acme] AD Review: draft-ietf-acme-star-delegation-04
> 
> Hi Roman,
> 
> On 08/03/2021, 12:50, "Roman Danyliw" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Thanks for adding the new CDDL schema and clean-up to the JSON schema.
> > This resolves all of my feedback from AD review.  I will advance the
> > document to IETF LC.
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> > One question I have in the -06 to -07 changes is why the use of IP
> > addresses was dropped for subjectAltName in the CSR template (the
> > addition of URI makes sense).
> 
> For the full context of where this choice originated, see:
> 
> https://github.com/yaronf/I-D/pull/132#discussion_r584316393

Thanks for the pointer.  I see that Yaron posed the same question that I did in the github discussion.  

That explanation works for me.

Regards,
Roman

> Note that we added an explicit extension point to the subjectAltName Type
> (subjectaltname-extension) where, if needed, IPs could be added back by a
> future spec:
> 
> $$subjectaltname-extension //= (
>   ? IP: [ 1* regtext ]
> )
> 
> cheers, t
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
> please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any
> other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any
> medium. Thank you.