There's no listing going on here, since there's no registry for the values. CABF could put tokens in their documents if they like.
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Salz, Rich <rs...@akamai.com> wrote: > > The two last ones are editorial, but the first about enumerating all BR > > methods isn't (since it needs new validation method identifiers). > > Thinking about it a bit more, I don't think it is appropriate for ACME to > list CABF things. That's a strong view as an individual, and a moderate > view as a WG chair. >
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list Acme@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
