On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 03:14:46PM +0000, Salz, Rich wrote: > > Couple of minor comments: > > These seem like all strictly editorial to me. Anyone disagree?
The two last ones are editorial, but the first about enumerating all BR methods isn't (since it needs new validation method identifiers). One list of all BR methods is: "contact-applicant" (method 1 validation) "contact-email" (method 2 validation) "contact-fax" (method 2 validation) "contact-sms" (method 2 validation) <-- Anyone scared yet? "contact-postal" (method 2 validation) "contact-phone" (method 3 validation) "domain-email" (method 4 validation) "authz-doc" (method 5 validation) "http" (method 6 validation) <-- ACME HTTP-xx. "dns" (method 7 validation) <-- ACME DNS-xx "ip" (method 8 validation) "test-cert" (method 9 validation) "random-cert" (method 10 validation) <-- Possbibly TLS-SNI-xx? (The method 2 has email, fax, SMS and postal mail as options, those four have rather different security properties). -Ilari _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list Acme@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
