Re: [Acme] Proposed ACME Charter Language

Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 13 May 2015 19:59 UTC

Return-Path: <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 648101A88D6 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 May 2015 12:59:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 chOPIXoSZHCh for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 May 2015 12:59:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x231.google.com (mail-wi0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::231]) (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 9442A1A8909 for <acme@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 May 2015 12:59:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wizk4 with SMTP id k4so213367886wiz.1 for <acme@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 May 2015 12:59:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=epA/ITDbvJhWY5epIY/mom3F73FQ0eHAGgdBS6CT444=; b=nRDjLjcRQ9xVTinNOm2z0o6T8TA61bXdiRI8PsGf1AM1w8L4a8zPuRSJTy1fJjX8cN HpQlxjxL2gEIksKtxG7grdPV+4J53jyO4YWU425iXyt4xIyuJ6jY70KS08JeIKKBFF6S seYTs0eb+zzqlj59T1FLCoU4gfUTrbTylfZrQdVZX32tRYz+QH1hb6Y0CF7EaOsrK6LW dj7G2AWzs6OGgW4WvG/MQgzFmlOvurZlGBjACi81c0WBu2WLIThEB/XWdXXEHUxW7Qt+ 1VsfCHZs76sjAkRxyXys2q/nTur12O8QxvQC6SQ8azKHNQXkG4wgJfNpU9q1QHfosO3v S0ow==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.85.116 with SMTP id g20mr1069693wjz.154.1431547187356; Wed, 13 May 2015 12:59:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.185.171 with HTTP; Wed, 13 May 2015 12:59:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2dc5d20a27664efe994398ec508f0e7e@ustx2ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com>
References: <6A9C3116-8CC9-472C-8AA8-F555D060834C@vigilsec.com> <55351EAB.1060905@cs.tcd.ie> <E81896AA-245F-48B7-9B38-86AC30D2F82A@vigilsec.com> <553523E4.2090808@cs.tcd.ie> <84718B26-1DA3-4D46-8B6F-B615806229D7@vigilsec.com> <CABcZeBOy2yBEMGMxcDy=E3fvc+OF1sZfvOV7twJHAvKqtrxtLg@mail.gmail.com> <28919F11-9336-41F6-9922-4E3E2DC4E935@gmail.com> <BD7B96B1-CD50-408F-AA06-49C20AB102A6@vigilsec.com> <CA+9kkMAH+U25ZhLq1HhGFHKMAECu+Y1ZJH-h4bOrEXaUQ15LjQ@mail.gmail.com> <87d225qwbq.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> <B30EDBDF-0803-4AB0-9EBB-DD726F617C5B@vigilsec.com> <2dc5d20a27664efe994398ec508f0e7e@ustx2ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 12:59:47 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMAQfGWoccd4s3VqB5rEXbbkve+594Pgkif+415hE3UGMA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bfcfd5094e7900515fc0d47
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/4JXgc9VoK1n6ZvR8ZBzoOR4NWuk>
Cc: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>, IETF ACME <acme@ietf.org>, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Subject: Re: [Acme] Proposed ACME Charter Language
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 13 May 2015 19:59:50 -0000

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com>; wrote:

>
> > The ACME working group is specifying ways to automate certificate
> issuance,
> > validation, revocation and renewal.  The ACME working group is not
> > reviewing or producing certificate policies or practices.
>
> +1  A nice clean statement of what is not in scope.
>

​I agree; I think this captures it well.

Ted​