I agree. There seems to be quite a bit of opposition on the PKIX list to extending the length. It was reasonably pointed out that things that process ASN.1 according to the schema will break.
However I would point out that this also rolls the other way — adding underscore should be safe, as the ASN.1 schema already allows this. > On Apr 10, 2017, at 12:33 PM, Ryan Sleevi via Public <[email protected]> > wrote: > > That's an interesting take. I read the same discussions and took quite the > opposite conclusion. > > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Ben Wilson via Public <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > All, <> > > > I’ve posted the proposal to the PKIX list and haven’t heard sufficient > opposition on that list, IMHO, that would merit holding up this proposed > revision to the Baseline Requirements. I need two endorsers for a ballot. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Ben > > > > From: Ryan Sleevi [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] > Sent: Monday, April 3, 2017 9:59 AM > To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Cc: Ben Wilson <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: Re: [cabfpub] RFC5280-related Ballot - For Discussion > > > > For those who want to understand why the IETF rejected this change, the > thread begins at > > > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pkix/MJwKL1lqRDuEAhqQ1Ydb5eWBSIs/?qid=ace7ed4844045716922706d6a80b0747 > > <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pkix/MJwKL1lqRDuEAhqQ1Ydb5eWBSIs/?qid=ace7ed4844045716922706d6a80b0747> > > > You can also see https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/376/ > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/376/> and the discussion at > https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pkix/current/msg02361.html > <https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pkix/current/msg02361.html> > > > This was reviewed prior to the production of 5280 - that is, it was known at > the time 5280 was produced, and was decided not to adopt - see > https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pkix/current/msg02357.html > <https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pkix/current/msg02357.html> and > https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pkix/current/msg02336.html > <https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pkix/current/msg02336.html> > > > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Ben Wilson via Public <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Here is a redlined version of sections 7.1.4.2.1 and 7.1.4.2.2 of the > Baseline Requirements which proposes amendments to the way the Baseline > Requirements handle the maximum length for subjectAltName, commonName and > organizationName and also clarifies the use of the underscore character. > > > > > > Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSP > VP Compliance > +1 801 701 9678 <tel:(801)%20701-9678> > <image003.jpg> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public > <https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public > <https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public> > > > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > [email protected] > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
