draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5280-i18n-update-04.txt   rfc8399.txt 
INTERNET-DRAFT Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. Housley
Internet Engineering Task Force R. Housley Request for Comments: 8399 Vigil Security
Intended Status: Proposed Standard Vigil Security Updates: 5280 May 2018
Updates: 5280 (once approved) Category: Standards Track
Expires: 12 April 2018 12 October 2017 ISSN: 2070-1721
Internationalization Updates to RFC 5280 Internationalization Updates to RFC 5280
draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5280-i18n-update-04
Abstract Abstract
These updates to RFC 5280 provide alignment with the 2008 The updates to RFC 5280 described in this document provide alignment
specification for Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and add with the 2008 specification for Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs)
support for Internationalized Email Addresses in X.509 Certificates. and add support for internationalized email addresses in X.509
certificates.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Status of This Memo
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This is an Internet Standards Track document.
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8399.
Copyright and License Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
Contributions published or made publicly available before November Contributions published or made publicly available before November
10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English. than English.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................3
1.1. Terminology ................................................3
2. Updates to RFC 5280 .............................................3
2.1. Update in the Introduction (Section 1) .....................4
2.2. Update in Name Constraints (Section 4.2.1.10) ..............4
2.3. Update in IDNs in GeneralName (Section 7.2) ................5
2.4. Update in IDNs in Distinguished Names (Section 7.3) ........6
2.5. Update in Internationalized Electronic Mail
Addresses (Section 7.5) ....................................6
3. Security Considerations .........................................7
4. IANA Considerations .............................................8
5. References ......................................................8
5.1. Normative References .......................................8
5.2. Informative References .....................................9
Acknowledgements ...................................................9
Author's Address ...................................................9
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document updates RFC 5280 [RFC5280]. The Introduction in This document updates the Introduction in Section 1, the Name
Section 1, the Name Constraints certificate extension discussion in Constraints certificate extension discussion in Section 4.2.1.10, and
Section 4.2.1.10, and the Processing Rules for Internationalized the Processing Rules for Internationalized Names in Section 7 of RFC
Names in Section 7 are updated to provide alignment with the 2008 5280 [RFC5280] to provide alignment with the 2008 specification for
specification for Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and add Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and add support for
support for Internationalized Email Addresses in X.509 Certificates. internationalized email addresses in X.509 certificates.
An IDN in Unicode (native character) form contains at least one An IDN in Unicode (native character) form contains at least one
U-label [RFC5890]. With one exception, IDNs are carried in U-label [RFC5890]. With one exception, IDNs are carried in
certificates in ACE-encoded form. That is, all U-labels within an certificates in ACE-encoded form. That is, all U-labels within an
IDN are converted to A-labels. Conversion of an U-label to an IDN are converted to A-labels. Conversion of a U-label to an A-label
A-label is described in [RFC5891]. is described in [RFC5891].
The GeneralName structure supports many different names forms, The GeneralName structure supports many different name forms,
including otherName for extensibility. [ID.lamps-eai-addresses] including otherName for extensibility. RFC 8398 [RFC8398] specifies
specifies the SmtpUTF8Mailbox for Internationalized Email addresses, the SmtpUTF8Mailbox for internationalized email addresses, which
which include IDNs with U-labels. includes IDNs with U-labels.
Note that Internationalized Domain Names in Applications Note that Internationalized Domain Names in Applications
specifications published in 2003 (IDNA2003) [RFC3490] and 2008 specifications published in 2003 (IDNA2003) [RFC3490] and 2008
(IDNA2008) [RFC5890] both refer to the Punycode Algorithm for (IDNA2008) [RFC5890] both refer to the Punycode algorithm for
conversion [RFC3492]. conversion [RFC3492].
1.1. Terminology 1.1. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here. capitals, as shown here.
2. Updates 2. Updates to RFC 5280
This section provides updates to several paragraphs of RFC 5280 This section provides updates to several paragraphs of RFC 5280
[RFC5280]. For clarity, if the entire section is not replaced, then [RFC5280]. For clarity, if the entire section is not replaced, then
the original text and the replacement text are shown. the original text and the replacement text are shown.
2.1. Update in Section 1, Introduction 2.1. Update in the Introduction (Section 1)
This update provides references for IDNA2008. This update provides references for IDNA2008.
OLD OLD
* Enhanced support for internationalized names is specified in * Enhanced support for internationalized names is specified in
Section 7, with rules for encoding and comparing Section 7, with rules for encoding and comparing
Internationalized Domain Names, Internationalized Resource Internationalized Domain Names, Internationalized Resource
Identifiers (IRIs), and distinguished names. These rules are Identifiers (IRIs), and distinguished names. These rules are
aligned with comparison rules established in current RFCs, aligned with comparison rules established in current RFCs,
including [RFC3490], [RFC3987], and [RFC4518]. including [RFC3490], [RFC3987], and [RFC4518].
NEW NEW
* Enhanced support for internationalized names is specified in * Enhanced support for internationalized names is specified in
Section 7, with rules for encoding and comparing Section 7, with rules for encoding and comparing
Internationalized Domain Names, Internationalized Resource Internationalized Domain Names, Internationalized Resource
Identifiers (IRIs), and distinguished names. These rules are Identifiers (IRIs), and distinguished names. These rules are
aligned with comparison rules established in current RFCs, aligned with comparison rules established in current RFCs,
including [RFC3987], [RFC4518], [RFC5890], and [RFC5891]. including [RFC3987], [RFC4518], [RFC5890], and [RFC5891].
2.2. Update in Section 4.2.1.10, Name Constraints 2.2. Update in Name Constraints (Section 4.2.1.10)
This update removes the ability to include constraints for a This update removes the ability to include constraints for a
particular mailbox. This capability was not used, and removing it particular mailbox. This capability was not used, and removing it
allows name constraints to apply to email addresses in rfc822Name and allows name constraints to apply to email addresses in rfc822Name and
SmtpUTF8Mailbox [ID.lamps-eai-addresses] within otherName. SmtpUTF8Mailbox [RFC8398] within otherName.
OLD OLD
A name constraint for Internet mail addresses MAY specify a A name constraint for Internet mail addresses MAY specify a
particular mailbox, all addresses at a particular host, or all particular mailbox, all addresses at a particular host, or all
mailboxes in a domain. To indicate a particular mailbox, the mailboxes in a domain. To indicate a particular mailbox, the
constraint is the complete mail address. For example, constraint is the complete mail address. For example,
"root@example.com" indicates the root mailbox on the host "root@example.com" indicates the root mailbox on the host
"example.com". To indicate all Internet mail addresses on a "example.com". To indicate all Internet mail addresses on a
particular host, the constraint is specified as the host name. For particular host, the constraint is specified as the host name. For
example, the constraint "example.com" is satisfied by any mail example, the constraint "example.com" is satisfied by any mail
address at the host "example.com". To specify any address within a address at the host "example.com". To specify any address within a
domain, the constraint is specified with a leading period (as with domain, the constraint is specified with a leading period (as with
URIs). For example, ".example.com" indicates all the Internet mail URIs). For example, ".example.com" indicates all the Internet mail
addresses in the domain "example.com", but not Internet mail addresses in the domain "example.com", but not Internet mail
addresses on the host "example.com". addresses on the host "example.com".
NEW NEW
A name constraint for Internet mail addresses MAY specify all A name constraint for Internet mail addresses MAY specify all
addresses at a particular host or all mailboxes in a domain. To addresses at a particular host or all mailboxes in a domain. To
indicate all Internet mail addresses on a particular host, the indicate all Internet mail addresses on a particular host, the
constraint is specified as the host name. For example, the constraint is specified as the host name. For example, the
constraint "example.com" is satisfied by any mail address at the constraint "example.com" is satisfied by any mail address at the
host "example.com". To specify any address within a domain, the host "example.com". To specify any address within a domain, the
constraint is specified with a leading period (as with URIs). For constraint is specified with a leading period (as with URIs). For
example, ".example.com" indicates all the Internet mail addresses example, ".example.com" indicates all the Internet mail addresses
in the domain "example.com", but not Internet mail addresses on in the domain "example.com" but not Internet mail addresses on
the host "example.com". the host "example.com".
2.3. Update in Section 7.2, IDNs in GeneralName 2.3. Update in IDNs in GeneralName (Section 7.2)
This update aligns with IDNA2008. Since all of Section 7.2 is This update aligns with IDNA2008. Since all of Section 7.2 is
replaced, the OLD text is not provided. replaced, the OLD text is not provided.
NEW NEW
Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) may be included in certificates Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) may be included in certificates
and CRLs in the subjectAltName and issuerAltName extensions, name and CRLs in the subjectAltName and issuerAltName extensions, name
constraints extension, authority information access extension, constraints extension, authority information access extension,
subject information access extension, CRL distribution points subject information access extension, CRL distribution points
extension, and issuing distribution point extension. Each of these extension, and issuing distribution point extension. Each of these
extensions uses the GeneralName type; one choice in GeneralName is extensions uses the GeneralName type; one choice in GeneralName is
the dNSName field, which is defined as type IA5String. the dNSName field, which is defined as type IA5String.
IA5String is limited to the set of ASCII characters. To accommodate IA5String is limited to the set of ASCII characters. To accommodate
internationalized domain names U-labels are converted to A-labels. IDNs, U-labels are converted to A-labels. The A-label is the
The A-label is the encoding of the U-label according to the Punycode encoding of the U-label according to the Punycode algorithm [RFC3492]
algorithm [RFC3492] with the ACE prefix "xn--" added at the beginning with the ACE prefix "xn--" added at the beginning of the string.
of the string.
When comparing DNS names for equality, conforming implementations When comparing DNS names for equality, conforming implementations
MUST perform a case-insensitive exact match on the entire DNS name. MUST perform a case-insensitive exact match on the entire DNS name.
When evaluating name constraints, conforming implementations MUST When evaluating name constraints, conforming implementations MUST
perform a case-insensitive exact match on a label-by-label basis. As perform a case-insensitive exact match on a label-by-label basis. As
noted in Section 4.2.1.10, any DNS name that may be constructed by noted in Section 4.2.1.10, any DNS name that may be constructed by
adding labels to the left-hand side of the domain name given as the adding labels to the left-hand side of the domain name given as the
constraint is considered to fall within the indicated subtree. constraint is considered to fall within the indicated subtree.
Implementations SHOULD convert IDNs to Unicode before display. Implementations SHOULD convert IDNs to Unicode before display.
Specifically, conforming implementations convert A-labels to U-labels Specifically, conforming implementations convert A-labels to U-labels
for display. for display.
Implementation consideration: There are increased memory Implementation consideration: There are increased memory requirements
requirements for IDNs. An IDN ACE label will begin with the four for IDNs. An IDN ACE label will begin with the four additional
additional characters "xn--", and an IDN can require as many as five characters "xn--", and an IDN can require as many as five ASCII
ASCII characters to specify a single international character. characters to specify a single international character.
2.3. Update in Section 7.3, IDNs in Distinguished Names 2.4. Update in IDNs in Distinguished Names (Section 7.3)
This update aligns with IDNA2008. This update aligns with IDNA2008.
OLD OLD
Domain Names may also be represented as distinguished names using Domain Names may also be represented as distinguished names using
domain components in the subject field, the issuer field, the domain components in the subject field, the issuer field, the
subjectAltName extension, or the issuerAltName extension. As with subjectAltName extension, or the issuerAltName extension. As with
the dNSName in the GeneralName type, the value of this attribute is the dNSName in the GeneralName type, the value of this attribute is
defined as an IA5String. Each domainComponent attribute represents a defined as an IA5String. Each domainComponent attribute represents a
single label. To represent a label from an IDN in the distinguished single label. To represent a label from an IDN in the distinguished
name, the implementation MUST perform the "ToASCII" label conversion name, the implementation MUST perform the "ToASCII" label conversion
specified in Section 4.1 of RFC 3490. The label SHALL be considered specified in Section 4.1 of RFC 3490. The label SHALL be considered
a "stored string". That is, the AllowUnassigned flag SHALL NOT be a "stored string". That is, the AllowUnassigned flag SHALL NOT be
set. set.
NEW NEW
Domain Names may also be represented as distinguished names using Domain names may also be represented as distinguished names using
domain components in the subject field, the issuer field, the domain components in the subject field, the issuer field, the
subjectAltName extension, or the issuerAltName extension. As with subjectAltName extension, or the issuerAltName extension. As with
the dNSName in the GeneralName type, the value of this attribute is the dNSName in the GeneralName type, the value of this attribute is
defined as an IA5String. Each domainComponent attribute represents a defined as an IA5String. Each domainComponent attribute represents a
single label. To represent a label from an IDN in the distinguished single label. To represent a label from an IDN in the distinguished
name, the implementation MUST convert all U-labels to A-labels. name, the implementation MUST convert all U-labels to A-labels.
2.4. Update in Section 7.5, Internationalized Electronic Mail Addresses 2.5. Update in Internationalized Electronic Mail Addresses
(Section 7.5)
This update aligns with IDNA2008 and [ID.lamps-eai-addresses]. Since This update aligns with IDNA2008 and RFC 8398 [RFC8398]. Since all
all of Section 7.5 is replaced, the OLD text is not provided. of Section 7.5 is replaced, the OLD text is not provided.
NEW NEW
Electronic Mail addresses may be included in certificates and CRLs in Electronic Mail addresses may be included in certificates and CRLs in
the subjectAltName and issuerAltName extensions, name constraints the subjectAltName and issuerAltName extensions, name constraints
extension, authority information access extension, subject extension, authority information access extension, subject
information access extension, issuing distribution point extension, information access extension, issuing distribution point extension,
or CRL distribution points extension. Each of these extensions uses or CRL distribution points extension. Each of these extensions uses
the GeneralName construct. If the email address includes an IDN but the GeneralName construct. If the email address includes an IDN but
the local-part of the email address can be represented in ASCII, then the local-part of the email address can be represented in ASCII, then
the email address is placed in the rfc822Name choice of GeneralName, the email address is placed in the rfc822Name choice of GeneralName,
which is defined as type IA5String. If the local-part of the which is defined as type IA5String. If the local-part of the
internationalized email address cannot be represented in ASCII, then internationalized email address cannot be represented in ASCII, then
the internationalized email address is placed in the otherName choice the internationalized email address is placed in the otherName choice
of GeneralName using the conventions in [ID.lamps-eai-addresses]. of GeneralName using the conventions in RFC 8398 [RFC8398].
7.5.1. Local-part Contains Only ASCII Characters 7.5.1. Local-Part Contains Only ASCII Characters
Where the host-part contains an IDN, conforming implementations MUST Where the host-part contains an IDN, conforming implementations MUST
convert all U-labels to A-labels. convert all U-labels to A-labels.
Two email addresses are considered to match if: Two email addresses are considered to match if:
1) the local-part of each name is an exact match, AND 1) the local-part of each name is an exact match, AND
2) the host-part of each name matches using a case-insensitive 2) the host-part of each name matches using a case-insensitive
ASCII comparison. ASCII comparison.
Implementations SHOULD convert the host-part of internationalized Implementations SHOULD convert the host-part of internationalized
email addresses specified in these extensions to Unicode before email addresses specified in these extensions to Unicode before
display. Specifically, conforming implementations convert A-labels display. Specifically, conforming implementations convert A-labels
to U-labels for display. to U-labels for display.
7.5.2. Local-part Contains Non-ASCII Characters 7.5.2. Local-Part Contains Non-ASCII Characters
When the local-part contains non-ASCII character, conforming When the local-part contains non-ASCII characters, conforming
implementations MUST place the internationalized email address in the implementations MUST place the internationalized email address in the
SmtpUTF8Mailbox within the otherName choice of GeneralName as SmtpUTF8Mailbox within the otherName choice of GeneralName as
specified in Section 3 of [ID.lamps-eai-addresses]. Note that the specified in Section 3 of RFC 8398 [RFC8398]. Note that the UTF8
UTF8 encoding of the internationalized email address MUST NOT contain encoding of the internationalized email address MUST NOT contain a
a Byte-Order-Mark (BOM) [RFC3629] to aid comparison. Byte-Order-Mark (BOM) [RFC3629] to aid comparison.
The comparison of two internationalized email addresses is specified The comparison of two internationalized email addresses is specified
in Section 5 of [ID.lamps-eai-addresses]. in Section 5 of RFC 8398 [RFC8398].
Implementations SHOULD convert the host-part of internationalized Implementations SHOULD convert the host-part of internationalized
email addresses specified in these extensions to Unicode before email addresses specified in these extensions to Unicode before
display. Specifically, conforming implementations convert A-labels display. Specifically, conforming implementations convert A-labels
to U-labels for display. to U-labels for display.
3. Security Considerations 3. Security Considerations
Conforming CAs SHOULD ensure that IDNs are valid. This can be done Conforming CAs SHOULD ensure that IDNs are valid. This can be done
by validating all code points according to IDNA2008 [RFC5892]. by validating all code points according to IDNA2008 [RFC5892].
Failure to use valid A-labels and valid U-labels may yield a domain Failure to use valid A-labels and valid U-labels may yield a domain
name that cannot be correctly represented in the Domain Name System name that cannot be correctly represented in the Domain Name System
(DNS). In addition, the CA/Browser Forum offers some guidance (DNS). In addition, the CA/Browser Forum offers some guidance
regarding internal server names in certificates [CABF]. regarding internal server names in certificates [CABF].
4. IANA Considerations 4. IANA Considerations
No IANA registries are changed by this update. This document has no IANA actions.
5. Normative References 5. References
[ID.lamps-eai-addresses] 5.1. Normative References
Melnikov, A. (Ed.) and W. Chuang (Ed.),
"Internationalized Email Addresses in X.509 certificates",
September 2017, <http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-lamps-
eai-addresses>, work-in-progress.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <http://www.rfc- DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3492] Costello, A., "Punycode: A Bootstring encoding of Unicode [RFC3492] Costello, A., "Punycode: A Bootstring encoding of Unicode
for Internationalized Domain Names in Applications for Internationalized Domain Names in Applications
(IDNA)", RFC 3492, DOI 10.17487/RFC3492, March 2003, (IDNA)", RFC 3492, DOI 10.17487/RFC3492, March 2003,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3492>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3492>.
[RFC3629] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO [RFC3629] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, DOI 10.17487/RFC3629, November 10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, DOI 10.17487/RFC3629, November
2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3629>. 2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3629>.
[RFC3987] Duerst, M. and M. Suignard, "Internationalized Resource [RFC3987] Duerst, M. and M. Suignard, "Internationalized Resource
Identifiers (IRIs)", RFC 3987, DOI 10.17487/RFC3987, Identifiers (IRIs)", RFC 3987, DOI 10.17487/RFC3987,
January 2005, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3987>. January 2005, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3987>.
[RFC4518] Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol [RFC4518] Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
(LDAP): Internationalized String Preparation", RFC 4518, (LDAP): Internationalized String Preparation", RFC 4518,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4518, June 2006, <http://www.rfc- DOI 10.17487/RFC4518, June 2006,
editor.org/info/rfc4518>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4518>.
[RFC5280] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S., [RFC5280] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S.,
Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
(CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, DOI 10.17487/RFC5280, May 2008, (CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, DOI 10.17487/RFC5280, May 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5280>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5280>.
[RFC5890] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for [RFC5890] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for
Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework", Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework",
RFC 5890, DOI 10.17487/RFC5890, August 2010, RFC 5890, DOI 10.17487/RFC5890, August 2010,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5890>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5890>.
[RFC5891] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names in [RFC5891] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names in
Applications (IDNA): Protocol", RFC 5891, DOI Applications (IDNA): Protocol", RFC 5891,
10.17487/RFC5891, August 2010, <http://www.rfc- DOI 10.17487/RFC5891, August 2010,
editor.org/info/rfc5891>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5891>.
[RFC5892] Faltstrom, P., Ed., "The Unicode Code Points and [RFC5892] Faltstrom, P., Ed., "The Unicode Code Points and
Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA)", Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA)",
RFC 5892, DOI 10.17487/RFC5892, August 2010, RFC 5892, DOI 10.17487/RFC5892, August 2010,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5892>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5892>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
6. Informative References [RFC8398] Melnikov, A., Ed. and W. Chuang, Ed., "Internationalized
Email Addresses in X.509 Certificates",
DOI 10.17487/RFC8398, May 2016,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8398>.
5.2. Informative References
[CABF] CA/Browser Forum, "Internal Server Names and IP Address [CABF] CA/Browser Forum, "Internal Server Names and IP Address
Requirements for SSL", Version 1.0, June 2012, Requirements for SSL: Guidance on the Deprecation of
<https://cabforum.org/internal-names/> Internal Server Names and Reserved IP Addresses provided
by the CA/Browser Forum", Version 1.0, June 2012,
<https://cabforum.org/internal-names/>.
[RFC3490] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello, [RFC3490] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello,
"Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)", "Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)",
RFC 3490, DOI 10.17487/RFC3490, March 2003, RFC 3490, DOI 10.17487/RFC3490, March 2003,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3490>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3490>.
Acknowledgements Acknowledgements
Thanks to Alexey Melnikov for the encouragement to write this update. Thanks to Alexey Melnikov for the encouragement to write this update.
Thanks to John Klensin and Patrik Falstrom for confirming many of the Thanks to John Klensin and Patrik Falstrom for confirming many of the
details in this update. Thanks to Ben Campbell, Wei Chuang, Spencer details in this update. Thanks to Ben Campbell, Wei Chuang, Spencer
Dawkins, Phillip Hallam-Baker, Warren Kumari, Alexey Melnikov, Adam Dawkins, Phillip Hallam-Baker, Warren Kumari, Alexey Melnikov, Adam
Roach, Tim Ruehsen, and Sean Turner for their careful review and Roach, Tim Ruehsen, and Sean Turner for their careful review and
comments. comments.
Authors' Address Author's Address
Russ Housley Russ Housley
Vigil Security, LLC Vigil Security, LLC
918 Spring Knoll Drive 918 Spring Knoll Drive
Herndon, VA 20170 Herndon, VA 20170
USA United States of America
EMail: housley@vigilsec.com Email: housley@vigilsec.com
 End of changes. 63 change blocks. 
111 lines changed or deleted 126 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.46. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/