Re: [Acme] Proposed ACME Charter Language

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Tue, 21 April 2015 11:00 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 24B5D1A9147 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 04:00:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 b1XG7QW_ENHi for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 04:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BA921A913F for <acme@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 04:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92AA3BEE1; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:00:10 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QvV4QuToSkPp; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:00:09 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.87.48.73] (unknown [86.46.17.62]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 19CB9BEDC; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:00:06 +0100 (IST)
Message-ID: <55362DB5.3000603@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:00:05 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.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> <55352A7D.2080201@cs.tcd.ie> <5F92A116-C190-44D7-BB06-C78156A18D15@vigilsec.com> <55354DA7.9010705@cs.tcd.ie> <9967F47E-89C4-4287-A8B2-2031F9A76395@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <9967F47E-89C4-4287-A8B2-2031F9A76395@vigilsec.com>
OpenPGP: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/6ebxnKM1svTCGgVP74c7FSp4nAA>
Cc: IETF ACME <acme@ietf.org>
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: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 11:00:15 -0000


On 21/04/15 11:53, Russ Housley wrote:
> Hotspot 2.0 is behind a paywall:
> https://www.wi-fi.org/hotspot-20-release-2-technical-specification-package-v110

Bummer;-( Not sure if someone can summarise what EST is being used
for there. Could be that it overlaps more with homenet/anima than
with acme for example, not sure.

I also asked a question below though and am interested in your take
on that:

>> Anyway EST carries (a profile of) CMC messages [1] doesn't it? So
>> aren't we really asking about use of CMC-defined, ASN.1 encoded
>> payloads here after all?

Cheers,
S.

>  Russ
> 
> 
> On Apr 20, 2015, at 3:04 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Hiya,
>> 
>> On 20/04/15 17:40, Russ Housley wrote:
>>> Stephen:
>>> 
>>>>> I'm willing to assume that an attempt to replace things that 
>>>>> people are using will meet with vigorous discussion.
>>>> 
>>>> Right. People are using CMC, but not afaik when dealing with
>>>> any public CAs for getting certificates for public Internet
>>>> services. I think CMP has some similar but much smaller set of
>>>> real uses. (*) And I'm not sure if EST has gotten traction.
>>>> SCEP has uses but that's another kettle of cans of worms and
>>>> fish;-)
>>>> 
>>>> I think it would be better to have the vigorous discussion
>>>> about CMC vs.ACME-JSON-etc (if that's the one we need to have)
>>>> before we form the WG. But is that in fact the meat of your
>>>> concern here? If so, then I assume you'd be arguing for use of
>>>> CMC/CRMF PDUs in ACME messages. If not, I'm not back to being
>>>> puzzled. Can you clarify?
>>> 
>>> I was not concerned about CMC, CMP, or SCEP.  My concern is
>>> around EST.  The Hotspot spec points to it, and we should see if
>>> others are using it.
>> 
>> (Do you have a ref for the hotspot spec? I don't know that one.)
>> 
>> Anyway EST carries (a profile of) CMC messages [1] doesn't it? So 
>> aren't we really asking about use of CMC-defined, ASN.1 encoded 
>> payloads here after all?
>> 
>> In case it helps, I think (open to correction of course) that
>> everyone would be fine with re-using and not duplicating PKCS#10,
>> at least for RSA, since that is what is well supported by well
>> deployed code. And that seems to be in the current ACME draft. [2]
>> So I think we're mostly talking about the bits and pieces of
>> CMC/CRMF that go beyond PKCS#10 - and it's those that are afaik
>> unused and where we oughtn't be fussed about duplicating (should
>> that be what the WG wants).
>> 
>> I do agree that we might want to think some more if there's
>> significant deployment of EST somewhere relevant, or if a good
>> argument that that's highly likely can be made.
>> 
>> I also agree that asking the question "why isn't EST good enough"
>> is totally valid, and that it'd be great if someone would summarise
>> the earlier thread on that. [3]
>> 
>> Cheers, S.
>> 
>> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7030#section-3 [2]
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-barnes-acme-01#section-4 [3]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/acme/current/msg00003.html
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Russ
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list
>>>  Acme@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
>>> 
> 
>