IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Acme] Challenge "errors" -> "error"

Daniel McCarney <cpu@letsencrypt.org> Fri, 12 January 2018 16:32 UTC

Return-Path: <dmccarney@letsencrypt.org>
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 5490B12D943 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 08:32:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=letsencrypt.org
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 Xh5Z33RPg_u4 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 08:32:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io0-x232.google.com (mail-io0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::232]) (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 CD2E212420B for <acme@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 08:32:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io0-x232.google.com with SMTP id v30so6440120iov.7 for <acme@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 08:32:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=letsencrypt.org; s=google; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=LDd21GWarHDpeEziy6FXXpUpvpywM44oWnLVpE4S6rw=; b=JmpFmnZiHbBzBoGcskaY0ReFSCr0OVf3vOsWCy0d2nlqAxUg5/ViBNvKJ3GMfm2iPA 0bsyb9JjKFA7Ebs4lGfPlrN58dUpgy0DrZiVdPJI2/mviiCKvYyCNpq/GPhlNzpjk79f mxR8bp9GcHZKAoUkMY3TKokVf+e9lEU46ULf8=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LDd21GWarHDpeEziy6FXXpUpvpywM44oWnLVpE4S6rw=; b=EpL0ES1RTJ3fkVkVnym0HptjngYa1lcfTpv9MCNCJ/RKk+pQhMMIOxKLNqo2OxN2KX nRG9gX/TeFgz8iRnJuDvZJiIC6bb4wWVzqr+rgYM7amGoYE9xvQ8f8tCXld33oo6XPvf XTb1Vp5x6f8ejIG2wKU6e2gJFtqSMQkV6LhmUOhAqhnJdJ4mbbP6KYy5MtQM1gSqQcP0 UCO81O9yej9tnPkYKLvG4AN9u1AXnT2xsspUWVtWbr2dFXBe19BcBNnEet31o0ixuyXF bacHRylte67k+hApyvSbOgNH/0uyRiC8s6z2JyXG9V9ZsPtKjfMZGsbsCF/aQ42GWu9O ZzZQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytcAreky9G1WfIF9Uu9mlfWmMOOa04vb4s72ZPv02ZFAz449RJkv bqP26UPoL4Ld2YUjdhwtudvPMT32wKjWdMGNtIgJ9A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBoucI7PEYMoLQABtWJPYFE1UY2Wz+b46Vj3EDAlbH5TAt/9bvrlzcSm8X0uZskIvS2XT4m64wIB8pkvIrWse3RM=
X-Received: by 10.107.53.95 with SMTP id c92mr1371487ioa.167.1515774729065; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 08:32:09 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: cpu@letsencrypt.org
Received: by 10.107.32.4 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 08:32:08 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <45551AC5-1EE2-4BF4-BD54-EE2E42658CE6@titanous.com>
References: <f066dc59-8483-aaf3-1093-89b786f7dc22@eff.org> <45551AC5-1EE2-4BF4-BD54-EE2E42658CE6@titanous.com>
From: Daniel McCarney <cpu@letsencrypt.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:32:08 -0500
Message-ID: <CAKnbcLiOb9dz+cedyFTPkE2h7CYkqjiKYraibC0AAhi4B-M5hw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Rudenberg <jonathan@titanous.com>
Cc: Jacob Hoffman-Andrews <jsha@eff.org>, "acme@ietf.org" <acme@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114491d0492841056296ceba"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/2C7UUfEUMZnoix4SuUjttusO99U>
Subject: Re: [Acme] Challenge "errors" -> "error"
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 16:32:12 -0000

+1 - I'm in favour of this change as well.

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 7:24 PM, Jonathan Rudenberg <jonathan@titanous.com>
wrote:

>
> > On Jan 8, 2018, at 13:37, Jacob Hoffman-Andrews <jsha@eff.org> wrote:
> >
> > In the course of testing Let's Encrypt's ACME v2 endpoint, we realized
> > that the latest draft specifies "errors" as a plural array on challenges
> > (vs singular "error" for earlier drafts implemented by Boulder and
> > others). However, the ACME spec now also has subproblems as a way to
> > express plural errors (mainly on new-order and finalize).
> >
> > This means we have two different ways to express multiple errors: One
> > for API requests, and one for validation responses. I propose to
> > simplify the spec by using subproblems consistently in both places:
> > https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/388
>
> This change makes sense to me.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Acme mailing list
> Acme@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email