[cabf_validation] Definition of "control" of a domain or IP address

[Adriano Santoni]

I am not implying that this matter has any important practical impact.

I just think, and wanted to share, that it would be neater if there was 
a general definition in 1.6.1, as IMO that of "control of a domain" (or 
IP address) is not too obvious a notion. But maybe I am the only one who 
thinks this - if that's the case, no problem.

Adriano

Il 17/11/2020 16:11, Ryan Sleevi ha scritto:
> Thanks for clarifying, Adriano.
>
> I suspect any definition added to 1.6.1 is going to be circular, at 
> best (e.g. "See 3.2.2.4 / 3.2.2.5"), or misinterpreted as being 
> limiting, as unfortunately is so often the trend.
>
> Perhaps you could help understand where or how this practically 
> impacts? I can think of a number of operational requirements that, 
> similar to control of a domain / IP address, be argued as definitions, 
> but worry that, like here, that would only further muddy things.
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 2:28 AM Adriano Santoni 
> <adriano.santoni at staff.aruba.it 
> <mailto:adriano.santoni at staff.aruba.it>> wrote:
>
>     I was referring to the Definitions in §1.6.1.
>
>     Sections 3.2.2.4 and 3.2.2.5 provide, in a way, an operational
>     definition of having control of a domain or IP address, but assume
>     that the general notion is known a priori.
>
>     I'd like a theoretical definition to be present in §1.6.1,
>     although I admit that it's not strictly necessary.
>
>     Adriano
>
>
>     Il 16/11/2020 17:30, Ryan Sleevi ha scritto:
>>     I believe the definition is "3.2.2.4 / 3.2.2.5"
>>
>>     Am I overlooking something to your question?
>>
>>     On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 10:59 AM Adriano Santoni via Validation
>>     <validation at cabforum.org <mailto:validation at cabforum.org>> wrote:
>>
>>         All,
>>
>>         If I am not mistaken, we do not have an express definition of
>>         "control" (of a domain or IP address) in the BR.
>>
>>         Is it because a definition is not deemed necessary or because
>>         it was overlooked?
>>
>>         (or maybe it's there and I am just not seeing it! I hope not...)
>>
>>         Adriano
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Validation mailing list
>>         Validation at cabforum.org <mailto:Validation at cabforum.org>
>>         https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/validation
>>         <https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/validation>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/validation/attachments/20201118/d6c5bb3a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4557 bytes
Desc: Firma crittografica S/MIME
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/validation/attachments/20201118/d6c5bb3a/attachment.p7s>