Re: [Acme] Supporting off-line (manual) validation

Phillip Hallam-Baker <> Mon, 27 July 2015 23:51 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0DE81A0162 for <>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 16:51:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W69Qx79tN6B8 for <>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 16:51:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BD781A03A1 for <>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 16:51:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lagw2 with SMTP id w2so58547882lag.3 for <>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 16:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=6P19vTnroeGTnCOxZaZvJ4iOtUILHl57XV9LbW0ikIA=; b=NjVVjj3kyM0KgCp0csiy5vqGiHdOyPiZKcYNaMBqYvk773BMeWHlw5tdvloduEwAFr ePbagoxsWVZZYl5fah6SiwKhYEmLnWrRnlM1QaCElQvWPd/WC62ZA2erqtJ7cS772aOy Ko5nK0ZW1R3KKtRaW/YXbiALXbQBp1MVkzXP7bnLzrA42yaVCLDUAg32mMHUj2G0lVcm 1/ahUwBNg17jlmg06dSGF+vss0gtc15tHh5o4cWPSRDr0WlQ2NySabBTd47WBEAQ57xw vedJeXSnPh92921MZ+osPjoSp+YuAZWnXiyW/UHkTMNwGMsWsd3MHkjEYGp0XM14ZAKe AxCw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id mb19mr30198194lbb.55.1438041071892; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 16:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 16:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 19:51:11 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: BL6tJtOmSQ5nGUCUOS1l7tswBHE
Message-ID: <>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <>
To: "Salz, Rich" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bfd047643415c051be40796
Archived-At: <>
Cc: Richard Barnes <>, Ted Hardie <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [Acme] Supporting off-line (manual) validation
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Automated Certificate Management Environment <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 23:51:15 -0000

As a general rule, any protocol that contains a component that may be
subject to variation in the field needs an IANA registry. Since we are
going to have multiple automatic validation processes we will be required
to have a registry even if there is only one entry at first.

For the offline part, I don't think that the border between automatic and
offline is quite as clear as some folk seem to think. Some validation
mechanisms are intrinsically offline we have a proposal for a completely
automatic one but virtually all the processes in use today are a mix of the

Even EV issue can be automated if you have an already validate credential
and a DV issue can return 'pending' for a host of reasons. And even if you
are doing EV you have to pass domain validation as well.

So I don't think this is a taxonomy thing. It is a 'label the process so
the automatic bits can be identified' thing and a 'this may not work
automatically' thing. So no to offline/xxxx but yes to a registry of
validation schemes.