Internationalization Updates to RFC 5280
draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5280-i18n-update-04

Summary: Has enough positions to pass.

Alissa Cooper Yes

Alexey Melnikov Yes

Kathleen Moriarty Yes

Eric Rescorla Yes

Deborah Brungard No Objection

Ben Campbell No Objection

Comment (2017-10-10 for -03)
-1.1: Please consider using the boilerplate from 8174. There's at least at least one use of a lower-case "should" (in 7.5.1, last paragraph).

Benoit Claise No Objection

Spencer Dawkins No Objection

Comment (2017-10-05 for -03)
You folks would know best what's actually clear to your intended audience, but the use of  "provide clarity on the handling of" in the Abstract,

   These updates to RFC 5280 provide clarity on the handling of
   Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and Internationalized Email
   Addresses in X.509 Certificates.

and in the first paragraph of the Introduction,

   This document updates RFC 5280 [RFC5280].  The Introduction in
   Section 1, the Name Constraints certificate extension discussion in
   Section 4.2.1.10, and the Processing Rules for Internationalized
   Names in Section 7 are updated to provide clarity on the handling of
   Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and Internationalized Email
   Addresses in X.509 Certificates.

wasn't particularly helpful to me.  Are there a few words that would describe (at a high level) what the problem with RFC 5280 was, that required this document (I'm suggesting saying "so if you implemented RFC 5280, you can expect problems A and B, so you probably want to implement this specification as well", but in different words)?

Suresh Krishnan No Objection

Warren Kumari No Objection

Comment (2017-10-10 for -03)
I had the same question as Spencer -- I'd be interested to know what lack of clarity was (so that people who were unclear, and read this will know what they might have guessed at!). I'm really not knowledgable in this field, so feel free to ignore if this would have been obvious to anyone reading 5280...

Mirja K├╝hlewind No Objection

Alvaro Retana No Objection

Adam Roach (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2017-10-18)
Thanks for addressing my DISCUSS.

Alia Atlas No Record

Terry Manderson No Record