<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<reference anchor="I-D.davey-tls-braid" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-davey-tls-braid-00">
   <front>
      <title>Bound Routing, Authority, and Identity Data (BRAID): Multi-Strand TLS Certificates with Structural, Owner-Controlled Revocation</title>
      <author initials="G." surname="Davey" fullname="George Davey">
         <organization>Davey Group LLC</organization>
      </author>
      <date month="July" day="2" year="2026" />
      <abstract>
	 <t>   This document defines BRAID, a negotiated profile and set of protocol
   mechanisms for publicly trusted TLS server certificates whose
   continued validity is bound to multiple independent &quot;strands&quot;: the
   issuing certificate authority&#x27;s signature (the Authority strand), an
   owner-controlled, DNSSEC-anchored freshness authorization carried by
   a short-lived Delegated Credential (the Identity strand), and an
   optional routing assertion that constrains the certificate to a
   network origin authorized in the global routing system (the Routing
   strand).  An optional Witness strand adds an appointed third-party
   co-signature.  The requirement to satisfy each strand is signed into
   the certificate, so the strands are load-bearing rather than
   advisory: a certificate that is missing or has a withdrawn required
   strand simply does not validate, and revocation becomes structural
   and owner-controlled rather than an optional status check.
   Impersonating a protected domain requires the concurrent compromise
   of two independently held credentials --- the end-entity key and the
   owner&#x27;s DNS publication path --- not either alone.  Because a
   compromised certificate can be neutralized within a short freshness
   window, BRAID certificates MAY be issued with multi-year validity
   periods, subject to root-program policy.  BRAID support is negotiated
   in the handshake, so a server presents a BRAID certificate only to a
   client that offers to validate it and presents a conventional
   certificate otherwise; deployment therefore breaks no existing
   client.  To remain deployable, BRAID reuses existing standards and
   certificate structures rather than reinventing them: short-lived keys
   use Delegated Credentials (RFC 9345); the requirement flag reuses the
   TLS Feature extension (RFC 7633); routing constraints reuse the ASN.1
   resource types of RFC 3779 inside BRAID&#x27;s own extension; witness
   attestations reuse the Certificate Transparency signed-timestamp and
   Merkle-log formats; routing validation is delegated to the client&#x27;s
   RPKI-validating resolver rather than performed in band; large
   validation proofs are transported by reference with client-side
   caching to stay within the initial congestion window; and enforcement
   is staged from monitor to strict using a policy model adapted from
   SPF, DKIM, and DMARC, including a graceful-degradation mode that
   bounds the availability risk of fail-closed operation.

	 </t>
      </abstract>
   </front>
   <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-davey-tls-braid-00" />
   
</reference>
