emu-wg / rfc7170bis

Revision to RFC 7170 TEAP
Other
0 stars 5 forks source link

Update Section 3.4 #24

Closed alandekok closed 1 year ago

alandekok commented 1 year ago

section 3.5: I wonder if additional references to RFC6125 and the UTA-bis version of that might be more clear. I think that this section is going to get beat on by security review. I also suggest that rather than saying how it is to be matched, I suggest the section be more prescriptive in how certificates are expected to be formed. (I recognize that this text has not changed since 7170)

@mcr

alandekok commented 1 year ago

fixed by commit ad89e0a