Re: [Acme] Considerations about ACME BoF

Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 31 March 2015 15:50 UTC

Return-Path: <yaronf.ietf@gmail.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 E7B8B1AC411 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 08:50:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Azm1jP4htOx4 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 08:50:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pd0-x231.google.com (mail-pd0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::231]) (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 796501ACDCB for <acme@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 08:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pdmh5 with SMTP id h5so12282247pdm.3 for <acme@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 08:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Sqshd7/dKnJ2D3SS11fuOTG9JesLftvfyTqlxf3rBmw=; b=OgR3D2FipglH2SR9Pvz+cP4vK+EJBWIZVNcF0/qKrlu0C9zym7QdlqO/fhVDy9rVun ml8Es8HfI8qyMcPqPCkPhUaM2MVzoWi0NRLuNt8Rnr298ZMwHgFHPfMl6j5IDjaRhhW4 aJptdKTDSO7AgL7sGPGu9rGlNVMO8JjzgCv1VIhD881yvQwS1CCEFddzJKWA3nIb1kD+ CX0iBRfas9ct+qyM3jQgRCwwGgdO8l0Eku8QiXdD4hDxtbDaMOi8RoIgiwvXtWpUuEJV iZTrX164BH88tbpyfK66ejZoyPIzAN2xkrAb6lHxLA9kt1LfjxYlCBl5zE1NqJft6dD2 G4ig==
X-Received: by 10.70.108.161 with SMTP id hl1mr70304010pdb.6.1427817033237; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 08:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.218.63] ([12.236.144.212]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id y2sm14348542pdm.31.2015.03.31.08.50.30 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 31 Mar 2015 08:50:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <551AB753.7030206@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 08:03:47 -0700
From: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Scott Rea <Scott.Rea@DigiCert.com>, acme@ietf.org
References: <551569F6.8020507@openca.org> <55157164.80805@cs.tcd.ie> <5519A5B6.9010707@DigiCert.com> <551A162F.9020105@gmail.com> <551A5937.1070608@DigiCert.com>
In-Reply-To: <551A5937.1070608@DigiCert.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/n1tZ2p926wRvppWtySItt3oNKz4>
Subject: Re: [Acme] Considerations about ACME BoF
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: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 15:50:37 -0000

Hi Scott,

On 03/31/2015 01:22 AM, Scott Rea wrote:
> G'day Yaron,
>
> I will make 2 brief observations:
>
> a) Max and I actually proposed some usability focused work around TLS
> certs to the PKIX WG about 6 or 7 years ago, when PKIX was still going
> strong, and we were told that usability is not the purvey of IETF, its
> purely bits on the wire. So when did IETF morph from bits on the wire to
> now include usability?
>
The IETF works on bits on the wire that are necessary to achieve 
business goals. And those goals certainly include usability.

> b) Getting a server certificate for a cloud server within seconds, and
> with no manual intervention is possible today with a little scripting on
> the server and an appropriate API from one of the existing CAs. If your
> current provider cannot do that for you, then I suggest you shop around
> a little.

I tried that and failed, I guess I should try some more. But anyway, as 
a customer I would like a standard interface so that this "little 
scripting" doesn't lock me into a single vendor.

>
> Regards,
> _Scott
>