Re: [Acme] DNS challenge spec doesn't support CNAME model

Jacob Hoffman-Andrews <> Fri, 18 December 2015 01:17 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EBA71B31BA for <>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 17:17:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.012
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.012 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eNNMYbozCtNk for <>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 17:17:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D213E1B31B6 for <>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 17:17:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=mail2; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:Cc:References:To:Subject; bh=zzMV3MX5kAArzUL4BxKszQVaI+s5qKZlPxAyAHybzbU=; b=s4w9mIcwXDO2UYSLq5I38VnKbNjT3oMemvVvrN1AOhPZvCJK3LD3Lmo6srhNIL+WAGl5VbaLHhkIJTMuOsQZv1EKfUrhvQxe4MVeAbuulQEwGzWI6g1x3gkZLTUlMtvIYeFS7kkjLzMcB0G8eLZws9KHumL+lXVesKApp8eISVs=;
Received: ; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 17:17:22 -0800
To: Andrew Ayer <>, Eric Mill <>
References: <> <> <> <>
From: Jacob Hoffman-Andrews <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 17:17:22 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: skipped for local relay
Received-SPF: skipped for local relay
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Acme] DNS challenge spec doesn't support CNAME model
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: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 01:17:25 -0000

> These third party services do have an option that would avoid the need
for their users to add a second CNAME: they could use the HTTP or TLS
SNI challenges. This would require extra engineering work, as they would
need to coordinate the installation/configuration of ACME challenge
responses across a fleet of servers as opposed to changing a DNS record.

Also, Let's Encrypt currently supports HTTP redirects. So a service
provider could set up a static redirect on all their frontends from
/.well-known/validation/<foo> ->
If acme-validator is assumed to be less widely distributed than the
general-purpose frontends, it would be easier to update quickly.