Re: [Acme] Proposed ACME Charter Language

Peter Eckersley <pde@eff.org> Thu, 14 May 2015 16:57 UTC

Return-Path: <pde@mail2.eff.org>
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 C5BCD1A8A25 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 May 2015 09:57:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.012
X-Spam-Level:
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 mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WRKSGPQN18DA for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 May 2015 09:57:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.eff.org (mail2.eff.org [173.239.79.204]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B988A1A89F9 for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 May 2015 09:57:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=eff.org; s=mail2; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date; bh=PJ2/pDz44TQNCLaPpQFaYaSuIBElzHApXOIJygJfwV4=; b=1QNcEdm8y0q3BLodtf8ho28p422xkxOV3h27zv+d+L9b8tutrtPrwvUIk+4pXpjppNGepVUY5j94hcURcZApjDlnQMqqKvwHqMH8ZkmhPAEEZmT1PVEux1M6GPC9MEeChqEGRuhSOS4eLknSItK0Q1xZT+a/NK4NqYW5i8Muz2Y=;
Received: ; Thu, 14 May 2015 09:57:33 -0700
Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 09:57:33 -0700
From: Peter Eckersley <pde@eff.org>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
Message-ID: <20150514165733.GA1376@eff.org>
References: <CA+9kkMDB_sc6NLc4zqJAYZq6ELjHCd=6g_9CyH6zTH2cK+0apQ@mail.gmail.com> <36ae09b7c2bf4d60baca1e8d8ba9fd44@ustx2ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <36ae09b7c2bf4d60baca1e8d8ba9fd44@ustx2ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/KuxHg-O4alIvd5aYId90QjxCjr4>
Cc: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, "acme@ietf.org" <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: Thu, 14 May 2015 16:57:38 -0000

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:39:36PM +0000, Salz, Rich wrote:
> > https://github.com/letsencrypt/acme-spec/issues
> 
> I'd prefer if we just recorded issues there, but discussed them in the mailing list.

Folks should also be aware that because letsencypt needs to move fast to
get working and interoperable clients and servers for its launch,
there's a fair chance that it will wind up with a deployed solution that
diverges from the draft spec in various ways, and can't block on an IETF
WG's deliberations.

For that reason I think it's probably best if the WG and spec work
doesn't start in earnest until after Let's Encrypt has launched (IIRC
that was the consensus in Dallas, too).  And in the pre-launch period, a
bug tracker is the most efficient and practical way for us to keep track
of things that we absolutely need to fix/diverge from the draft spec on.

-- 
Peter Eckersley                            pde@eff.org
Chief Computer Scientist          Tel  +1 415 436 9333 x131
Electronic Frontier Foundation    Fax  +1 415 436 9993