Re: [Acme] Proposed ACME Charter Language

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

On 20/04/15 17:40, Russ Housley wrote:
> Stephen:
> 
>>> I'm willing to assume that an attempt to replace things that
>>> people are using will meet with vigorous discussion.
>> 
>> Right. People are using CMC, but not afaik when dealing with any 
>> public CAs for getting certificates for public Internet services. I
>> think CMP has some similar but much smaller set of real uses. (*) 
>> And I'm not sure if EST has gotten traction. SCEP has uses but 
>> that's another kettle of cans of worms and fish;-)
>> 
>> I think it would be better to have the vigorous discussion about 
>> CMC vs.ACME-JSON-etc (if that's the one we need to have) before we
>> form the WG. But is that in fact the meat of your concern here? If
>> so, then I assume you'd be arguing for use of CMC/CRMF PDUs in ACME
>> messages. If not, I'm not back to being puzzled. Can you clarify?
> 
> I was not concerned about CMC, CMP, or SCEP.  My concern is around
> EST.  The Hotspot spec points to it, and we should see if others are
> using it.

(Do you have a ref for the hotspot spec? I don't know that one.)

Anyway EST carries (a profile of) CMC messages [1] doesn't it? So
aren't we really asking about use of CMC-defined, ASN.1 encoded
payloads here after all?

In case it helps, I think (open to correction of course) that everyone
would be fine with re-using and not duplicating PKCS#10, at least for
RSA, since that is what is well supported by well deployed code. And
that seems to be in the current ACME draft. [2] So I think we're mostly
talking about the bits and pieces of CMC/CRMF that go beyond PKCS#10 -
and it's those that are afaik unused and where we oughtn't be fussed
about duplicating (should that be what the WG wants).

I do agree that we might want to think some more if there's significant
deployment of EST somewhere relevant, or if a good argument that that's
highly likely can be made.

I also agree that asking the question "why isn't EST good enough" is
totally valid, and that it'd be great if someone would summarise the
earlier thread on that. [3]

Cheers,
S.

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7030#section-3
[2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-barnes-acme-01#section-4
[3] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/acme/current/msg00003.html



> 
> Russ
> 
> _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list 
> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
>