[Servercert-wg] [EXTERNAL] State or Province

Wayne Thayer wthayer at mozilla.com
Thu Sep 5 10:34:37 MST 2019

On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 7:54 AM Ryan Sleevi via Servercert-wg <
servercert-wg at cabforum.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 10:09 AM Richard Smith <rich at sectigo.com> wrote:
>> OK, then yes, England is acceptable.  But wait, 3166-2 says England is a
>> country.  That’s not a state or a province.  How about right below England
>> on the page, we have England and Wales.  Is that acceptable for the ST
>> field?  But 3166-2 says that’s a nation.  That’s not a state or a province
>> either.  And BTW what the heck is the difference (from the perspective of
>> this ISO standard) between a country and a nation, because I’ve always
>> thought they were synonyms.  I guess someone, either in the UK, or over at
>> ISO would disagree.
> Right, to be clear, I agree 100% with Jeremy that we should get it to a
> MUST and absolutely should get consistency. The question is, as you point
> out, consistency "with what". The challenge is that 3166-2 includes many
> levels of hierarchy, not just "the immediate second".
> If we can agree to some generic mapping of 3166-2 subdivisions to
stateOrProvince, then there is value in adding that as a SHOULD. Linters
can then start warning on this rule and provide the data we'll need to feel
comfortable moving the requirement to a MUST.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/attachments/20190905/c9eaa010/attachment.html>

More information about the Servercert-wg mailing list