Yes, in the already published version 2.0.2, the section 7.1.5 is included.
This section is empty as many other sections in the TLS BRs, for example,
7.1.7, 7.1.8 and 7.1.9, which are just right after.
> Hopefully we can add pointers to the right name constraints language
Sure.
De:
On 4/1/2024 5:50 μ.μ., Ben Wilson wrote:
I think this is listed as an issue in GitHub -
https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/issues/444.
Indeed, the cleanup ballot brings back the number 7.1.5 but the section
is empty, despite the real information being already included in other
sections
I think this is listed as an issue in GitHub -
https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/issues/444.
On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 4:54 AM Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via
Servercert-wg wrote:
> Dear Members,
>
> While taking another pass at reviewing the new certificate profiles
> introduced in
Dear Members,
While taking another pass at reviewing the new certificate profiles
introduced in ballot SC62, I realized that there is some deviation from
the RFC 3647 structure that the BRs should maintain to help alignment of
CA CP/CPS documents.
This is the structure defined by RFC 3647
