Re: [Acme] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-acme-tls-alpn-06

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 02 October 2019 20:28 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 B474712002F; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 13:28:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=j3TwrgO+; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=zhy9zTfp
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 gfwzCnZu-kIt; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 13:28:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19431120018; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 13:28:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BE5C223B1; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 16:28:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 02 Oct 2019 16:28:07 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm1; bh=6 Q+JBGHBL+JWtezBRltO4EXvGhB5r5TiaeO5CtIYdRw=; b=j3TwrgO+SBKRmyjX6 1zg+pLDhs1YtB7kwOoMNZT0TuNSbBKhasbcNrFqLb1cK4kGvAqYVRsBRgy+o4z/z hyZc1uaK+1FipsMVyzSgpR+LK1/e34qm9XxdIdx4isnmfqlje7/M6X6nOoqt8LfU sKrArxnwuIaKSQQKNVsYFarR+sm24RQRKt15J01l5zkwl8L6rMT8N9ab0ioTi1+x QEPHqe1EzwlgnH8x5RoYFZJCz54lsmvUUHOIOgfc6Obsb3tSh6H5ufr3k/Q/Ljkz 4gFaS9vsRWA8+b5E4kEAjDcJdrMOELpiPP0dRx+hzYVBzhsUSqN7bmp41JGrNcMA 6DcXg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=6Q+JBGHBL+JWtezBRltO4EXvGhB5r5TiaeO5CtIYd Rw=; b=zhy9zTfpdu46WL+jjNdOZHSYL28lwdvCL0s6t5O9O8PRL/LxTR+No9rD6 zx9iPRTYbikSH3G2MkhtUc3x0SEOjfSH6SUoBVmmd2RZPYZGZB7lJUK6LEG4l4zF xKzOFosSfGNKIS0EcMWKjDGYsqr6Eih+AKZIIfeR4UWHlNxFMIIK/sMqVH0PHh8S V7PbVec2cXhXMePRcpsHe0ydcbbBWOKRec+lsbG7qE9depLxs1od8Q+y7UYIZX2M NAzub77ECIB4gyKyHT+Zb8pTYwOVKqh5unxVzkisbllz5+vMZxZmDGGskN+v3Taj aYDtzKQz60TG41kLwDKR18VBCr2cw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:VgiVXZxGxa4o2nQcTgYxlWVgBePgD5QyIaZQIwZzk3EbNKkGw73eiw>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrgeeigddugeelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhjgffgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtjeenucfhrhhomheptehlihhs shgrucevohhophgvrhcuoegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhnqeenucffohhmrg hinhepihgvthhfrdhorhhgnecukfhppedujeefrdefkedruddujedrjeehnecurfgrrhgr mhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhnnecuvehluhhsth gvrhfuihiivgeptd
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:VgiVXRdJsclHs7AHisDEXJ_8osttFQ8QuCcF5gcqkEnoR5WqTpzIug> <xmx:VgiVXe6K1QQEsn8FBrSoNgSpU01stG0r-Gb6-xLeaOWyvWsIJL-8fQ> <xmx:VgiVXWKBnsNf3BGFoWUeJ9LUOtCwwS04r4CIqB7VxmBS2qWt8Van7Q> <xmx:VwiVXQ88RraOOzYn7RHs5t-zfmwqnCtOcxpH6d85ycmvqtEqpFbqMQ>
Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro3.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.75]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 54EE1D6005B; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 16:28:06 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <156901954237.5133.10619701231448265955@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 16:28:05 -0400
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-acme-tls-alpn.all@ietf.org, acme@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <89A443A6-582B-4586-9366-260218482E94@cooperw.in>
References: <156901954237.5133.10619701231448265955@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/Z-qGgADqUG__xnj9AcQ5Vme-YNc>
Subject: Re: [Acme] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-acme-tls-alpn-06
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: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 20:28:10 -0000

Linda, thanks for your review. One comment below.

> On Sep 20, 2019, at 6:45 PM, Linda Dunbar via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
> Review result: Ready with Nits
> 
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
> like any other last call comments.
> 
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-acme-tls-alpn-06
> Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
> Review Date: 2019-09-20
> IETF LC End Date: 2019-09-25
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
> 
> Summary:
> This document specifies a new "challenges" for Automated Certificate Management
> Environment
> 
> Major issues:
> 
> Minor issues:
> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> The 3rd paragraph of the Introduction stated that this New Challenges requires
> negotiating a new application layer protocol, but no existing software
> implements this protocol. Therefore the ability to fulfill this challenges is
> effectively "opt-in". I find the statement is quite confusing. Does it mean
> that it is necessary to manually add processing to handle the challenge because
> there is no implementation of auto negotiation?

I think the point of this text is just to explain why the validation model was designed as it was — because it need not accommodate any existing deployed base.

I entered a No Objection ballot.

Alissa

> 
> Thanks,
> Linda Dunbar
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art