IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Acme] -09 draft: Challenge objects?

Daniel McCarney <cpu@letsencrypt.org> Fri, 02 March 2018 16:32 UTC

Return-Path: <dmccarney@letsencrypt.org>
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 18AC412D77C for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Mar 2018 08:32:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=letsencrypt.org
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 80qqHgKEf-bV for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Mar 2018 08:32:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-it0-x22d.google.com (mail-it0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1621D126E01 for <acme@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Mar 2018 08:32:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-it0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id j7so2476838ita.3 for <acme@ietf.org>; Fri, 02 Mar 2018 08:32:45 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=letsencrypt.org; s=google; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=QsNCcYr28iS7Tt91uc4QVRC1V9PQFRO3rSxj+tNrBHU=; b=EagfsktEuiJ5n+Z8c4lQuk9MdHxJ1EUlLKEoAoiCgR0gf36pd3DlH5cHqEzNDk8beL IglMfqsVaZwrW2AJmMlHKutB9JmcfLOwVMwHOhNA5LUk2zkJPkvvF/SPovN43glN8no5 3d7B8/wDX+MnHgLXdIUl8IAzRZwRL4d7Pla50=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QsNCcYr28iS7Tt91uc4QVRC1V9PQFRO3rSxj+tNrBHU=; b=ewKMU+QsLxAT7JUaHASy83kSAlTWLaYwywqLBIbWsQrUzK9cChlHmMzU91HjJvWUo5 al2o09fO11Llsdd2BbSmgbOJ4Mu+L+a+bjCrTj3bpSKtKDU7zaKI9WIFcxGEf0prUt7r /AwbBzDFASRgpW401u7qVx7Bibss36563ti7mK/ohKJCSFBwels+SQFA3LF/GC/l6oyV 93/gX9cJMXEM2LxTMLaUuya90h/nnqrssIBwkGZTm7XdSLMgUMjIb0i2pcnzTQcEnF1q sRy2w6AYjsZo6IyrfhDXfTZoSF1J8TnJz74/gIySZx41DFSVXsAcZABF0DEYrTb/f9/t z9sw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7F/kjIV09JjBDiQkDlJ2Zsg3htdaq/zZyLz66h3iiYdLj3GR5Zi nYoP6yg6FCYsUYhnSCFDGl40r5TOlRtElHtVtjnomA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELt1g1w+aynvH4UEOtaqH3QJ0xBq4MD6/J4oNj31GDrjSs8FXoZVUSLlKXKs4qHVV4UiRFEMuHsrdRUFgoEPp5A=
X-Received: by 10.36.190.199 with SMTP id i190mr3172463itf.11.1520008364451; Fri, 02 Mar 2018 08:32:44 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: cpu@letsencrypt.org
Received: by 10.107.21.2 with HTTP; Fri, 2 Mar 2018 08:32:43 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <B76012DC-ABC4-4EA6-A83D-4885C0750392@felipegasper.com>
References: <D2C46F45-94D3-41E3-AA9A-ADEA9A40B288@felipegasper.com> <CAKnbcLjivwt2Fw1aWOE+g4RthHTiz=_bfRM2GReZ_Q+05OF1LA@mail.gmail.com> <B76012DC-ABC4-4EA6-A83D-4885C0750392@felipegasper.com>
From: Daniel McCarney <cpu@letsencrypt.org>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2018 11:32:43 -0500
Message-ID: <CAKnbcLjv+VBt9RsURWMz2HRFOWn2g7_MSUvVMfw1gBAgeM+3TQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Felipe Gasper <felipe@felipegasper.com>, Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
Cc: IETF ACME <acme@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c19e8909e836005667086c2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/hThc2j4Cbn8h8Q-Ofet4EMoT60o>
Subject: Re: [Acme] -09 draft: Challenge objects?
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 02 Mar 2018 16:32:47 -0000

>
> Would it be sensible to move the common list of parameters there as well,
> for parity with how the other object types are described?


I think the forward pointer is probably sufficient.

Richard: What do you think?

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Felipe Gasper <felipe@felipegasper.com>
wrote:

> Hi Daniel,
>
>         It definitely helps, yes. Would it be sensible to move the common
> list of parameters there as well, for parity with how the other object
> types are described?
>
> -Felipe
>
> > On Mar 2, 2018, at 9:34 AM, Daniel McCarney <cpu@letsencrypt.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Felipe,
> >
> > Does this PR from Richard Barnes address your feedback?
> https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/399
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 8:50 AM, Felipe Gasper <felipe@felipegasper.com>
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> >         I’ve been looking over the -09 draft and have created a Perl
> client module against Pebble as well as LE’s new testing endpoint.
> >
> >         I’m curious about whether the specification intends to define
> Challenge objects. They appear to exist, of course, but they’re not defined
> as objects per se in section 7.1 of the draft.
> >
> >         Thank you!
> >
> > -Felipe Gasper
> > Mississauga, ON
> > _______________________________________________
> > Acme mailing list
> > Acme@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
> >
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email