Re: [Acme] ACME or EST?

How about XKMS? It has much less ASN.1, its all angle brackets.

Stephen F. knows about it, he was the WG chair.

Less ASN.1 is always good.

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> wrote:
> A few things off the top of my head:
>
> * If nothing else, much less ASN.1.  (Cf. JOSE vs. CMS)
> * Support for other certificate management functions, e.g., revocation
> * Validation of possession of identifiers
> * Cleaner use of HTTP
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
>>
>> Greetings again. The abstract of the ACME pre-draft at
>> https://github.com/letsencrypt/acme-spec (which Richard will hopefully
>> publish as a real draft soon) says:
>>
>>    This
>>    document describes a protocol that a certificate authority (CA) and a
>>    applicant can use to automate the process of verification and
>>    certificate issuance. The protocol also provides facilities for
>>    other certificate management functions, such as certificate
>>    revocation.
>>
>> This overlaps a lot with "Enrollment over Secure Transport" (EST),
>> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7030>.
>>
>> For many people who saw last week's announcement, the main use case of
>> ACME is "make it easy to create a client that can create a key, get it
>> enrolled with a server, get the new certificate back, and install that
>> certificate in a web server". What does/will ACME offer that EST does not
>> already?
>>
>> --Paul Hoffman
>> _______________________________________________
>> Acme mailing list
>> Acme@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Acme mailing list
> Acme@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
>