Re: [Acme] Support for domains with redundant but not immediately synchronized servers

Michael Wyraz <michael@wyraz.de> Tue, 09 February 2016 20:57 UTC

Return-Path: <michael@wyraz.de>
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 1CBFE1ADBF8 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 12:57:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 Y8_MrqU0bVpb for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 12:57:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.wyraz.de (web.wyraz.de [37.120.164.129]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EE301B29A2 for <acme@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 12:57:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wyraz.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16356A3146 for <acme@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 21:57:50 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at web.wyraz.de
Received: from mail.wyraz.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (web.wyraz.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jlRsHDQxgRry for <acme@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 21:57:49 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.1.200] (p578521F0.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.133.33.240]) (Authenticated sender: michael@wyraz.de) by mail.wyraz.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 90EA99FB6E for <acme@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 21:57:49 +0100 (CET)
To: acme@ietf.org
References: <565C84A1.9040102@wielicki.name> <20151204084601.GQ18430@eff.org> <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E13BB473EFFB@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com> <56A0C558.2070202@wielicki.name> <046f30469e8d4cdfafb01b7e7f9d4608@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <56B9BDD8.9010008@wielicki.name> <56B9C501.6000106@wyraz.de> <56B9DEA8.3090009@wielicki.name> <56B9EF4E.4030807@wyraz.de> <56BA40A1.2040304@wielicki.name>
From: Michael Wyraz <michael@wyraz.de>
Message-ID: <56BA52CD.4060406@wyraz.de>
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 21:57:49 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56BA40A1.2040304@wielicki.name>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="bR12qbS5A5xe1SU7Vk0uQBxm96eTDHj46"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/wdkwlb6NZwUmpTJnt0q4HcZu2yA>
Subject: Re: [Acme] Support for domains with redundant but not immediately synchronized servers
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: <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: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 20:57:53 -0000

Hi Jonas,
> So if I understand this correctly, the ACME client would have to set
> (or modify) the SRV records in such a way that the host which is
> currently running the client is the one with the highest priority?
> This sounds like you could just use the DNS challenge, right?
>
> And it is a different use-case from the one I posted initially. If the
> clients were able to modify the DNS properly, I could indeed use the
> dns-01 challenge in my scenario. This is not the case though.
You're right, I missunderstood your use case and thought, the client
only runs on a certain of the servers. Using SRV records will not solve
this special use case.