Re: [Acme] Support for domains with redundant but not immediately synchronized servers

[Jonas Wielicki <[e-mail]>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hello list,

On 07.12.2015 01:32, Manger, James wrote:
>>> Ideally, it [Let's Encrypt] would use the IP of the requester 
>>> (of course only after it has verified that the IP is in the 
>>> DNS) or allow the requester to specify a preferred IP.
> 
> This is quite a sensible feature request from Jonas. It supports 
> multiple servers for a domain while encouraging keys that are tied 
> to a single piece of hardware, without adding extra coordination 
> requirements. It doesn't feel too onerous for CAs to implement.

Having the keys bound to a single piece of hardware (or administrative
sub-domain) is also what we had in mind. Thank you for bringing that
up in clearer wording.

>> There's a fairly good solution available with the current 
>> protocol, which is to serve a (long lived) redirect from 
>> /.well-known/acme-challenge/ on all of the servers to a
>> different URL that is always answered by the machine you run an
>> ACME client on.
> 
> This redirect-based workaround feels far from ideal. It assumes 1 
> server does all the ACME bits, which discourages per-hardware
> keys. It requires more coordination between servers (1 is
> different; others need its IP; need some extra mechanism to
> distribute key+cert once issued).

We totally agree. The additional coordination overhead feels
unnecessary and error prone.

I am not at all familiar with the processes in an IETF WG. What is the
way forward to get my proposal either into the protocol or officially
dismissed?

best regards,
Jonas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=ftJz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----