Re: [Acme] ACME or EST?

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Thu, 27 November 2014 12:20 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
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 1A7DC1A88FA for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 04:20:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.011
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable
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 KfIbGz85sKi9 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 04:19:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DE541A88E4 for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 04:19:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1Xty32-0008V4-5H; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 12:19:48 +0000
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 07:19:47 -0500
Message-ID: <m27fyg4yzg.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <DEC7A8A8-563D-41B3-94AC-71DC7219D3F8@cisco.com> <CAHOTMVLJFQsKUVaZueeqx4NRtzM+a4asU14YnQPC+2LHQCtcEQ@mail.gmail.com> <54752FD9.6040708@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <AD5940AA-6F01-4D0E-A4E0-19AEA56BBED3@vpnc.org> <CAL02cgTgpjQffow2XuaNuT7BtqYVttXdVUgyqBFbsAbN4g0VzQ@mail.gmail.com> <DEC7A8A8-563D-41B3-94AC-71DC7219D3F8@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/VB4xSsLj2gu369G5wGHXofNHVx8
Cc: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, "acme@ietf.org" <acme@ietf.org>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Subject: Re: [Acme] ACME or EST?
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, 27 Nov 2014 12:20:08 -0000

> I would also like to ensure that the operational model that is implied
> by ACME is congruent enough with EST that an operator might be able to
> use both in parallel - if possible.

could you explain why?  transition?

Tony Arcieri <bascule@gmail.com> wrote:
> ASN.1 is *not* "LANGSEC-friendly". JOSE comes a lot closer. For that reason
> alone, ASN.1 is inferior.

are there pure LR parsers for jose?

Stephen Farrell wrote:
> Frankly, I couldn't give a rat's arse if its asn.1 or xml or json or
> punch cards via courier, or pigeons, so long as it works well enough,
> as a default, and at scale.

i would think you, of the farrelous brothers, would be concerned about
the langsec-friendly aspect.

randy