[Acme] CAA in draft-ietf-acme-client-01.txt

Carl Mehner <c@cem.me> Mon, 18 May 2020 15:41 UTC

Return-Path: <c@cem.me>
X-Original-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 754743A05A4 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 May 2020 08:41:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cem.me
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yn5RQU2qUUFJ for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 May 2020 08:41:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x12c.google.com (mail-lf1-x12c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7A4E3A07E9 for <acme@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 May 2020 08:41:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x12c.google.com with SMTP id h26so8485304lfg.6 for <acme@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 May 2020 08:41:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cem.me; s=cem; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=tIfL5Leqn2VJdzk0kZWleMt5sjNUc7I4orwEbfJiErk=; b=kaUVErF03V5dWv1lXm1bSqLseb++9mA+IRtS4sIQiiXrIq/MNP/zC/S09ZHck3psTN XkFKk22mckVgfh77wdLn5Llezgq73QhI6B/vQRkbEdIccZ/UedWXOlj4AKdiO7kWvXQW KFU/QAVuwhTrsbS5nJtVOXskAxsaJ5wcafNC4=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=tIfL5Leqn2VJdzk0kZWleMt5sjNUc7I4orwEbfJiErk=; b=hCHigpJt0LuEP/v+R2lyhjd1bcer3h6eyIfbW228Cy8gYaXKYnKkRb+yOfXreaULjd 09jAXWZWz6FSDtFxiY/Wm1xrqU0zhmZcppNNZKFV7yzw4VjwCbjE245XHyhq8rNzmgyo OKLYUz3yefVVzAaPMilNxA6oWQfPgBx7mNxSRsImDFDw8HfFkTcYbnf9rocbMHjl8Vi9 rX2lvhmgxnuiFS/rHB04NYgBjPDuNeE68EP58u15Jz//GLfgiEYD+/iDJqoiK9ukoywa 5AomT7kbiF9HxrXw5T0WgQYp5MoY6jinJcj9gt2NzuWXogivQgXVg4pohRxIAHCWsd/t iTkw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ISIcJrOj4gBFhHwepJvuGv4kQjQIYCqOVsJ2wLfbK+e5bsrmm X+i4EImrRlAjw6zTVvhyfLIGdbL/yKSaKpNavXXd64E/60s=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxOZ96n4txH5jjdoTMGVxIB3i4zFrUyT6eEYIb+qSElx1cjW8LaqqL4aKOw7uWfWXb8Oh6BtQTj9vZ2AvHFTj8=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:6c4:: with SMTP id 187mr11710393lfg.1.1589816468972; Mon, 18 May 2020 08:41:08 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <158981033392.26980.4468928473194139329@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <158981033392.26980.4468928473194139329@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Carl Mehner <c@cem.me>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 10:40:58 -0500
Message-ID: <CAEa9xj4x16PYeX9jcBxdPmR08AkOEN6jZ5RfxQKQy0xgT-4CCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: acme@ietf.org
Cc: Kathleen.Moriarty@dell.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/1y4PIwDbBVYo1J4cDLmuqiwPAig>
Subject: [Acme] CAA in draft-ietf-acme-client-01.txt
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Automated Certificate Management Environment <acme.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/acme/>
List-Post: <mailto:acme@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 15:41:16 -0000

Looking at the latest draft for acme-client, I noticed that it mentions CAA:
   CAA helps as anyone verifying a certificate used for code signing can
   verify that the CA used has been authorized to issue certificates for
   that organization.

However, in the CAA RFC it states:
   Relying Applications MUST
   NOT use CAA records as part of certificate validation.

I propose removing the statement in acme-client about CAA that is quoted above.

-carl mehner