##### 7.1.2.10.8 CA Certificate Name Constraints
If present, the Name Constraints extension MUST be encoded as follows. As an explicit exception from RFC 5280, this extension SHOULD be marked critical, but MAY be marked non-critical if compatibility with certain legacy applications that do not support Name Constraints is necessary.
Table: `nameConstraints` requirements
| __Field__ | __Description__ |
| -- | -------- |
| `permittedSubtrees` | |
| `GeneralSubtree` | The requirements for a `GeneralSubtree` that appears within a `permittedSubtrees`. |
| `base` | See following table. |
| `minimum` | MUST NOT be present. |
| `maximum` | MUST NOT be present. |
| `excludedSubtrees` | |
| `GeneralSubtree` | The requirements for a `GeneralSubtree` that appears within a `permittedSubtrees`. |
| `base` | See following table. |
| `minimum` | MUST NOT be present. |
| `maximum` | MUST NOT be present. |
The following table contains the requirements for the `GeneralName` that appears within the `base` of a `GeneralSubtree` in either the `permittedSubtrees` or `excludedSubtrees`.
Table: `GeneralName` requirements for the `base` field
| __Name Type__ | __Presence__ | __Permitted Subtrees__ | __Excluded Subtrees__ |
| -- | - | ---- | ---- |
| `dNSName` | MAY | The CA MUST confirm that the Applicant has registered the `dNSName` or has been authorized by the domain registrant to act on the registrant's behalf. See [Section 3.2.2.4](#3224-validation-of-domain-authorization-or-control). | If at least one `dNSName` instance is present in the `permittedSubtrees`, the CA MAY indicate one or more subordinate domains to be excluded. |
| `iPAddress` | MAY | The CA MUST confirm that the Applicant has been assigned the `iPAddress` range or has been authorized by the assigner to act on the asignee's behalf. See [Section 3.2.2.5](#3225-authentication-for-an-ip-address). | If at least one `iPAddress` instance is present in the `permittedSubtrees`, the CA MAY indicate one or more subdivisions of those ranges to be excluded. |
| `directoryName` | MAY | The CA MUST confirm the Applicant's and/or Subsidiary's name attributes such that all certificates issued will comply with the relevant Certificate Profile (see [Section 7.1.2](#712-certificate-content-and-extensions)), including Name Forms (See [Section 7.1.4](#714-name-forms)). | It is NOT RECOMMENDED to include values within `excludedSubtrees`. |
| `rfc822Name` | NOT RECOMMENDED | The CA MAY constrain to a mailbox, a particular host, or any address within a domain, as specified within [RFC 5280, Section 4.2.1.10](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5280#section-4.2.1.10). For each host, domain, or Domain portion of a Mailbox (as specified within [RFC 5280, Section 4.2.1.6](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5280#section-4.2.1.6)), the CA MUST confirm that the Applicant has registered the domain or has been authorized by the domain registrant to act on the registrant's behalf. See [Section 3.2.2.4](#3224-validation-of-domain-authorization-or-control). | If at least one `rfc822Name` instance is present in the `permittedSubtrees`, the CA MAY indicate one or more mailboxes, hosts, or domains to be excluded. | If no `rfc822Name` instance is present in the `permittedSubtrees`, then the CA MAY include a zero-length `rfc822Name` to indicate no mailboxes are permitted. |
| `otherName` | NOT RECOMMENDED | See below | See below | See below |
| Any other value | NOT RECOMMENDED | - | - | - |
Any `otherName`, if present:
1. MUST apply in the context of the public Internet, unless:
a. the `type-id` falls within an OID arc for which the Applicant demonstrates ownership, or,
b. the Applicant can otherwise demonstrate the right to assert the data in a public context.
2. MUST NOT include semantics that will mislead the Relying Party about certificate information verified by the CA.
3. MUST be DER encoded according to the relevant ASN.1 module defining the `otherName` `type-id` and `value`.
CAs SHALL NOT include additional names unless the CA is aware of a reason for including the data in the Certificate.