> On 17 Jun 2020, at 18:10, Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> wrote: > >> >> Now that it is it represents a new convention. The question at hand is >> whether the information found on the LHS could be subject to >> misinterpretation by non-participants. I wonder if we could add an EKU >> as a SHOULD to break the logjam. > > Because EKUs are so much easier to get into CAs than otherName is? > Seriously, how does that help at all?
I have definitely seen at least some CAs allow EKUs, such as XMPP, for instance, and was thinking of SHOULD rather than MUST. But I do have to say that XMPP didn’t have a great experience with them, to be fair. Eliot
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list Anima@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
