Re: [Acme] RFC 8823 email-reply-00: How to concatenate the tokens?
Richard Körber <acme2@ml.shredzone.de> Mon, 07 June 2021 05:23 UTC
Return-Path: <acme2@ml.shredzone.de>
X-Original-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F26D3A3701 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Jun 2021 22:23:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=i7o.de
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 dUa-iKiSdtPl for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Jun 2021 22:23:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from i7o.de (i7o.de [95.216.117.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B38E3A3700 for <acme@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Jun 2021 22:23:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=i7o.de; s=dkim_1; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version: Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=qG7kFNN6Jlt93a6h3tzK/lkACIT91eunz2x35X4tbUk=; b=DnZRRQfn+Q5mI2Pxw5FS/1IWME ImChO/X2sgDxPi6UwP0OQ0rGAua+lhrrmf0rJhw6L4yY8iVbvThbXoguUtBGlI4fv+E3xThohHT9N ouXEOCx39PdV4Hkv5BShPGuToIEWEUVvi3a3RmC6KUXp6YzKrRxEw3PN7TI9iSbpcrg8=;
Received: from p5ddd7e3a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.221.126.58] helo=[192.168.0.17]) by i7o.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from <acme2@ml.shredzone.de>) id 1lq7jc-00010G-Sy for acme@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2021 07:23:36 +0200
To: acme@ietf.org
References: <MN2PR13MB3567BA0D2CE6CD4420DB2FAC9F389@MN2PR13MB3567.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
From: Richard Körber <acme2@ml.shredzone.de>
Message-ID: <47a71fa3-93ba-965b-0993-bfc37e492284@i7o.de>
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2021 07:23:36 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR13MB3567BA0D2CE6CD4420DB2FAC9F389@MN2PR13MB3567.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/LOE4oR8N2t_JnYv05Jn3EfFqJcw>
Subject: Re: [Acme] RFC 8823 email-reply-00: How to concatenate the tokens?
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 07 Jun 2021 05:23:47 -0000
> Also be careful about your assumptions about the tokens themselves. > While RFC 8555 makes requirements about base64url encoded token values, > RFC 8823 does not make any requirements about the content of the > "token-part2" text value. Yes, I was misguided by the example. This is a strong argument for a plain string concatenation. > >From my reading, the RFC 8823 requirement text is sufficient to > explain this but having an example of the pre-digest Key Authorization > value would be helpful to clarify this. The example currently includes > only the Key Authorization digest but not the intermediate concatenated > value. I agree. An example would be helpful to leave no room for interpretation. Thank you for your help! Best, Richard Körber
- [Acme] RFC 8823 email-reply-00: How to concatenat… Brian Sipos
- Re: [Acme] RFC 8823 email-reply-00: How to concat… Richard Körber
- Re: [Acme] RFC 8823 email-reply-00: How to concat… Alexey Melnikov