Re: [Acme] AD Review of draft-ietf-acme-email-smime-07

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Fri, 26 June 2020 09:17 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
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 59A403A1210 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 02:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isode.com
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 9ii3humiqhRZ for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 02:17:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from statler.isode.com (Statler.isode.com [62.232.206.189]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 165573A11E7 for <acme@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 02:17:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1593163049; d=isode.com; s=june2016; i=@isode.com; bh=4uBJAGJ0NZvrhBw0vWcvjgN7teTK9H3F41AN5fbtXjw=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=YHKKosxb+GS+5MT/DX735LeWEXethvc9q0vLFxVLOrrPaGIIZfNl8zx6j+VcIeh+p6dTiU DqPRxI9eWaopyHTGwD93dq6cVdC7bmP4SquXZ4hNmN9S7uy/j7lR4J6pZcriV/xEpzPuRy V9mfEED0gcEk2FQ8qHifcP+9u2BoVws=;
Received: from [172.27.252.104] (connect.isode.net [172.20.0.72]) by statler.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <XvW9KQBLOUvU@statler.isode.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 10:17:29 +0100
To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>, IETF ACME <acme@ietf.org>
References: <8ecce2820f344c34a124bffa95bd20b6@cert.org> <1467f346-8c44-ef41-8b60-b57fde1102a1@isode.com> <aacd956af9f74f8089bea360564e4621@cert.org>
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Message-ID: <c56b9f71-2d20-d399-ed95-69b4a832b2cb@isode.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 10:17:07 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0
In-Reply-To: <aacd956af9f74f8089bea360564e4621@cert.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/nS_hE6WChI6BhW1yP4eyhkYMpAo>
Subject: Re: [Acme] AD Review of draft-ietf-acme-email-smime-07
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: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 09:17:33 -0000

On 25/06/2020 19:48, Roman Danyliw wrote:

> Hi Alexey!
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Acme <acme-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Alexey Melnikov
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 11:38 AM
>> To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>rg>; IETF ACME <acme@ietf.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Acme] AD Review of draft-ietf-acme-email-smime-07
>>
>> Hi Roman,
>>
>> On 22/05/2020 15:54, Roman Danyliw wrote:
> [snip]
>
>>> ** Section 7.  Per "Any claims about the correctness or    fitness-for-purpose
>> of the email address must be otherwise assured", I don't follow the intent of
>> this text.  For example, what is the "correctness ... of the email address"?  What
>> is meant by "assurances"?
>>
>> This was based on feedback from one of reviewers. It is basically saying
>> that issued ACME certificates don't vouch for anything other than "this
>> email seems to belong to the entity that requested it". Does this make
>> sense?
> This cautionary clarification makes more sense to me.  Can you fold in some language to that effect into a revision.
>
> Given that this is the last of that changes, this update can be made with other IETF LC feedback.
Ok, I will do this in -09.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman
>
>
>
>
>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Alexey
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Acme mailing list
>> Acme@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
> _______________________________________________
> Acme mailing list
> Acme@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme