On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 5:55 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 10:56 PM Emily Stark <estark@google.com> wrote:
> > Might have been blindly cribbed from HSTS/HPKP -- I don't remember
> discussing it specifically for Expect-CT. Filed https://github.com/httpwg/
> http-extensions/issues/637
>
> Thanks.
>
> >> CAs can (and do) issue IP certificates, so why does this specifically
> >> exclude those? If this is a requirement imposed by CT, then please
> >> cite that. Otherwise, I think that this should allow IP literals.
> >
> >
> > This was also cribbed from HSTS/HPKP. I'll try to find out the
> motivation for including it in those specs; I'm a little wary of dropping
> it from Expect-CT without understanding why it's there for the other two...
>
> There was some confusion about the status of IP certificates at some
> points in the past. I don't think that it is necessary to concern
> this spec with the types of identifier that need to be covered.
>
Right, that's listed in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6797#appendix-A for
HSTS, and as HPKP originally started as an option of HSTS, it retained that
functionality. The difficulty in both interoperability (in clients) and
obtaining an IP certificate (by servers)