Re: [Acme] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8555 (5983)

James Kasten <jdkasten@umich.edu> Tue, 25 February 2020 14:21 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200214181853.537B6F40709@rfc-editor.org> <20200225014621.GD5814@kduck.mit.edu> <CAL02cgQHhHn-7wju28a8Lt=yihYy4-Hz8UZPgg0oyy0vgYgYnQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL02cgQHhHn-7wju28a8Lt=yihYy4-Hz8UZPgg0oyy0vgYgYnQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: James Kasten <jdkasten@umich.edu>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 06:21:32 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAEpsx-w0CkZuwy_J7YrMwcnfdvQieJd6VcKJY92RX0qVwUJTA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
Cc: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Jacob Hoffman-Andrews <jsha@eff.org>, Daniel McCarney <cpu@letsencrypt.org>, Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>, "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>, Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>, thebaker@google.com, IETF ACME <acme@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002c9ff5059f6735cc"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/N5n4WL2-LFE7y1hiHepnNLgboDs>
Subject: Re: [Acme] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8555 (5983)
Precedence: list

I agree.

On Tue, Feb 25, 2020, 5:05 AM Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> wrote:

> This seems Verified to me.
>
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 8:46 PM Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> wrote:
>
>> Authors, should this be marked Verified?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ben
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 10:18:53AM -0800, RFC Errata System wrote:
>> > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8555,
>> > "Automatic Certificate Management Environment (ACME)".
>> >
>> > --------------------------------------
>> > You may review the report below and at:
>> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5983
>> >
>> > --------------------------------------
>> > Type: Technical
>> > Reported by: Jason Baker <thebaker@google.com>
>> >
>> > Section: 9.1
>> >
>> > Original Text
>> > -------------
>> >    A file of this type contains one or more certificates encoded with
>> >    the PEM textual encoding, according to [RFC7468].  The textual
>> >    encoding of certificates in this file MUST use the strict encoding
>> >    and MUST NOT include explanatory text.  The ABNF for this format is
>> >    as follows, where "stricttextualmsg" and "eol" are as defined in
>> >    Section 3 of RFC 7468:
>> >
>> >    certchain = stricttextualmsg *(eol stricttextualmsg)
>> >
>> > Corrected Text
>> > --------------
>> >    A file of this type contains one or more certificates encoded with
>> >    the PEM textual encoding, according to [RFC7468].  The textual
>> >    encoding of certificates in this file MUST use the strict encoding
>> >    and MUST NOT include explanatory text.  The ABNF for this format is
>> >    as follows, where "stricttextualmsg" is as defined in
>> >    Section 3 of RFC 7468:
>> >
>> >    certchain = stricttextualmsg *(stricttextualmsg)
>> >
>> > Notes
>> > -----
>> > Examples within RFC 8555 indicate that only one EOL should be present
>> between entries in the PEM chain.
>> >
>> > RFC 7468 already defines a stricttextualmsg as ending with EOL
>> > stricttextualmsg = preeb eol
>> >                            strictbase64text
>> >                            posteb eol
>> >
>> > If a second EOL is to be added before each strict textual message this
>> would result in a blank line between entries.  The prior example in
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8555#section-7.4.2 indicates an intention
>> for only one EOL marker to be used:
>> >    -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----
>> >    [End-entity certificate contents]
>> >    -----END CERTIFICATE-----
>> >    -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----
>> >    [Issuer certificate contents]
>> >    -----END CERTIFICATE-----
>> >    -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----
>> >    [Other certificate contents]
>> >    -----END CERTIFICATE-----
>> >
>> > Instructions:
>> > -------------
>> > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
>> > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
>> > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
>> > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>> >
>> > --------------------------------------
>> > RFC8555 (draft-ietf-acme-acme-18)
>> > --------------------------------------
>> > Title               : Automatic Certificate Management Environment
>> (ACME)
>> > Publication Date    : March 2019
>> > Author(s)           : R. Barnes, J. Hoffman-Andrews, D. McCarney, J.
>> Kasten
>> > Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
>> > Source              : Automated Certificate Management Environment
>> > Area                : Security
>> > Stream              : IETF
>> > Verifying Party     : IESG
>>
>

[Acme] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8555 (5983) RFC Errata System
Re: [Acme] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8555 (5… Benjamin Kaduk
Re: [Acme] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8555 (5… Richard Barnes
Re: [Acme] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8555 (5… James Kasten