Subject: Re: [Dbound] handling of single-label DNS Names (was: Draft problem statement and IETF "bar BoF"

From: =JeffH <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 12:20:05 -0800

>> On a related point, there was some question as to whether entries for
 >> "example" and "*.example" were both useful in the list.  You indicated
 >> that they were not (and I can see that is the case in the current PSL,
 >> both by entries and by testing), and my initial response was agreement.
 >> However, it is not clear to me from the specified algorithm that
 >> "*.example" implies "example".  If that implication is intentional, then
 >> it seems inconsistent with the specification as I read it: "The wildcard
 >> character * (asterisk) matches any valid sequence of characters in a
 >> hostname part" and "Wildcards may only be used to wildcard an entire
 >> level" [1].
 >
 > "*.example" does indeed NOT imply "example", or any shorter rule in
 > fact. However, if the number of labels in the two rules you are looking
 > at differs by only 1, what does it mean to list them both? In this case,
 > when would the "example" rule ever get matched? Only by http://example/
 > - but then such dotless names normally don't get checked against the PSL
 > anyway, as it's assumed that they are intranet names.

Note also that the above is the gist of Adam Barth's reply/contribution to 
the "HTTP cookie processing wrt "public suffixes"" thread over on http-state@

Re: [http-state] HTTP cookie processing wrt "public suffixes"
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/http-state/current/msg01444.html

=JeffH