IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Acme] Re: Call for adoption: draft-geng-acme-public-key-06 (Ends 2026-05-12)

Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com> Tue, 05 May 2026 18:38 UTC

Return-Path: <ilariliusvaara@welho.com>
X-Original-To: acme@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: acme@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B51E3E9700CA for <acme@mail2.ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2026 11:38:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1778006291; bh=6Fojy4Am+66wanCw1pwkNq9l6Xbp+EBxEdX0Zn/9EFo=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=aIlwH2tBb+ziqOh3yoSs8H919xTGNN760wF8fFMFEC9W+SLLHqoSUpiPUc7LcUm+u UuGTTRYZIWrj5FDqL4fzLDNnkzU2ixlAniVN4yrLW+efXg2QzXJvARToJWCO+wVQQi 9CnARD0QowpJ6Qk7npmkwyeepHZSa5CxAj/TX1Kw=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=welho.com
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YHU2A1r0cc_a for <acme@mail2.ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2026 11:38:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.dnamail.fi (sender001.dnamail.fi [83.102.40.178]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74239E96FFF0 for <acme@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2026 11:38:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.dnamail.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEEDD2113E0B for <acme@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2026 21:37:59 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: X-Virus-Scanned: amavis at smtp.dnamail.fi
Received: from smtp.dnamail.fi ([83.102.40.178]) by localhost (dmail-psmtp01.s.dnaip.fi [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id 70dJwcuECPt6 for <acme@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2026 21:37:58 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from LK-Perkele-VII2 (87-92-117-27.bb.dnainternet.fi [87.92.117.27]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hliusvaa@dnamail.internal) by smtp.dnamail.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A288B2113E00 for <acme@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2026 21:37:58 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.dnamail.fi A288B2113E00
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=welho.com; s=2025-03; t=1778006278; bh=yf1zsZkLHETicqnzExNAD/Jlpio+CFkh+PejmkhtDK0=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Zp1XAtxWLea4eCRhOZwUZzwSwxjQF4V12EEMlvjyY52tosZA0jFuurvM3KXDbqxBg r1b7Y7S5E5BX8Y0JHJT5qK/p4vMm2rUxzJ56V+j+BB/cZ4RIvadqQsyA0O2gFnrvKX 6krkg9vR60k/w2O31Qp45JknGgZ+o6dNn73sdRlzOLvNfQEG5NojGV72vmtKWs4xJB /v8ISJuXjUVamKq9Vu8TOOfL6i4qtS+cHUpyrMPTml0E4CARP3M9+5A92OWph60XyH eo3tMi2wOVB8LYr6zYL7GpV2qTPpPzQEcFHGdlEWQXGIg3ha87oZr7mb+JjrM1ZSNC ih3VCxZubDbyw==
Date: Tue, 05 May 2026 21:37:58 +0300
From: Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com>
To: "acme@ietf.org" <acme@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <afo5BmIlcm0cQ8jM@LK-Perkele-VII2.locald>
References: <177741722137.243357.10440835172964235548@dt-datatracker-b45949c58-t72jx> <15374.1777570611@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <3BE2723E-6FD5-45F3-B5AF-BE5C2D05B91F@trustasia.com> <23423.1777994174@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <23423.1777994174@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Sender: ilariliusvaara@welho.com
Message-ID-Hash: DVKULBYLWAFUWFNS42ZEYSFIIR3XUNQJ
X-Message-ID-Hash: DVKULBYLWAFUWFNS42ZEYSFIIR3XUNQJ
X-MailFrom: ilariliusvaara@welho.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-acme.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [Acme] Re: Call for adoption: draft-geng-acme-public-key-06 (Ends 2026-05-12)
List-Id: Automated Certificate Management Environment <acme.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/fzk2awR4MI4OF8KWdjM2KiUj8Gg>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/acme>
List-Help: <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:acme-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:acme@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:acme-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:acme-leave@ietf.org>

On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 11:16:14AM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> palos.chen <palos.chen@trustasia.com> wrote:
>     >> It seems that this almost suffers from the same mis-understanding of
>     >> challenges as acme-rats originally did. At least though, the intention
>     >> is that it is pk-01 OR dns-01 OR http-01 OR ... (not AND as rats
>     >> needed)
> 
>     > In -07, pk-01 is no longer entangled with identifier validation. We
>     > introduced a new "pk" identifier type (Section 3); pk-01 is bound to
>     > "pk" identifiers and proves possession of the certificate private key
>     > only. Existing challenges (dns-01, http-01, ...) remain bound to their
>     > own identifier types per [RFC8555] without modification.
> 
> But, it's the wrong approach.
> You have to change pk-01 each time someone comes along with a new challenge
> type.   What you are doing is orthogonal to the challenge.

The public key stuff is fully orthogonal to everything else. You would
only need to change pk-01 in order to support a new type of key. And
adding a new type of key would be a major deal.




-Ilari

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status