IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Acme] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8555 (5861)

Deb Cooley <debcooley1@gmail.com> Thu, 04 January 2024 11:15 UTC

Return-Path: <debcooley1@gmail.com>
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 77A11C14F6B2 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 03:15:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.857
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.857 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wby5jUdo5bly for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 03:15:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io1-xd33.google.com (mail-io1-xd33.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d33]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AD98C14F5FE for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 03:15:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io1-xd33.google.com with SMTP id ca18e2360f4ac-7b7fb34265fso15808839f.3 for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 04 Jan 2024 03:15:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1704366914; x=1704971714; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+9vhkpeYnTohQ5HFCgrrCdwlFcPCOiiwQ7owEC/mBa8=; b=IYCFmVWeq19GTh0CwRTYeXvLpnWRG2a/nBtfcQT5JGZBPWd7hcVV7OI8i+9rGddfpN l1kvA/6epfSHiyXw8HdbH1HkxTLBGOg8Y6T74ziiN38jVRZ9zx8B4n6m532iOT/nKMl/ 1LESPkx8ehdNsP2q+wA1cOmwxhapeiuCkHcF7twJ/PQ+UfhMYdWhoHNSeePiHCupsAqt EpL0PkW47XQ6TSKDvQ3sDrtqodFb6hsUZGbLU90cY25mmLxyCEwzAXoEp/aArpHeWjBA hdhqherwDQP9qUmz8J3fvu6zVuNjvVcYu9W6xJhgeml5qSsjSlVWkBd37dUrdFmjVOb4 A7zg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1704366914; x=1704971714; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=+9vhkpeYnTohQ5HFCgrrCdwlFcPCOiiwQ7owEC/mBa8=; b=Dla22+W0RSqtia6tlar837zohk6D6Df3TeE5D7yH0qzX9rXXeR6zwpjdSESgTDvCsQ 2rEhdSYarR11d9dkNONDQ0krCzv5rgcp4NQXgVmsJYUzY3IgRN45kTMecnxAegqyIuHQ b8W+DyafNJIHLkgEZB3DnaLgpAAbLrdL6XvEGZjGqZ9UdxELfFcwDjKAAT25leR/ApC7 kel3xlxXO4SD5z169jE8ZGh3XTYuJ0cdVw+D39aiGcX0z0o6duIZQgTkWESqP29w5qdt PK6Syr4hoFX6rUIU2DwSCDtwAl6DNoEdNJJPDxmnjND7SG6sdV6nqd/kieWmYmZOV+e6 WDPw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzGSuEfCzhy4yzK/Xqa3RfwTNYo8o2Uqz5ocoSL5PXHHPFdC/z7 Z2bKTTQrxstOGWU/lLyK2lVhdlNNMMPx3sehvg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF1+5Mgizwr+qGREojbt2NvQtRYs57A4uZ+BIXkNV+aFxL4+veWwyqHjZCoTiHEJpd7ZpFuJIKeP9l7oTaWu4A=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1bc5:b0:360:1914:49b with SMTP id x5-20020a056e021bc500b003601914049bmr422931ilv.47.1704366914111; Thu, 04 Jan 2024 03:15:14 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190923103508.6D126B80D81@rfc-editor.org> <CAGgd1OfecWRy4wZwLoBhzQKYNY8_hbQ2EN+CHdWtNffyc7k5MQ@mail.gmail.com> <CH0PR20MB67082ED780F3C22618C607C6DB60A@CH0PR20MB6708.namprd20.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CH0PR20MB67082ED780F3C22618C607C6DB60A@CH0PR20MB6708.namprd20.prod.outlook.com>
From: Deb Cooley <debcooley1@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2024 06:14:52 -0500
Message-ID: <CAGgd1OdF1fP6Wn3fsQoLMAjOTji7Be=6H9q_b7Wh_LBFYySaag@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jacob Hoffman-Andrews <jsha@eff.org>
Cc: "rlb@ipv.sx" <rlb@ipv.sx>, "jdkasten@umich.edu" <jdkasten@umich.edu>, "cpu@letsencrypt.org" <cpu@letsencrypt.org>, "ofriel@cisco.com" <ofriel@cisco.com>, "rdd@cert.org" <rdd@cert.org>, "ynir.ietf@gmail.com" <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>, "acme@ietf.org" <acme@ietf.org>, "rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org" <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007b8e6a060e1cd85b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/TU0Ef8wawdlu9Ju-J0yt_tp_uFs>
Subject: Re: [Acme] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8555 (5861)
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Thu, 04 Jan 2024 11:15:22 -0000

Thanks.  I'll mark this as 'Rejected'.  If Owen wants to resubmit it taking
this into account, he can.

Deb

On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 3:28 PM Jacob Hoffman-Andrews <jsha@eff.org> wrote:

> This overspecifies things. When someone requests to create a new
> authorization object (or requests to create a new order object that would
> necessitate creation of new authorization objects), it is up to server
> policy whether to reuse an existing authorization or not. For instance a
> server might have a policy of never reusing authorization objects (that is,
> doing validation from scratch every time), or it might have a policy of
> reusing only pending authorization objects, or only ones created in the
> last N hours or days.
>
> So I think we should not accept this errata as it stands.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email