I also want to note that rfc8499bis contains the same "Domain Name" definition which was objected to by multiple IESG members. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-integrations/ballot/ (in RFC-editor Q, on missref) So, if you didn't like that definition before, then probably you should object to RFC8499bis keeping it. -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
