+1

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Daniel McCarney <c...@letsencrypt.org>
wrote:

> Hi Sophie,
>
>  I think there are two "mistakes" in this example:
>
>
> Agreed on both mistakes. Thanks for flagging!
>
> To avoid unnecessary confusion, I suggest that the table could look something
>> like this:
>
>
> I like your proposed fixes. I think the only change I'd request is that I
> think the "Fetch challenges" action should have a plural request stage "GET
> order authorization*s*". Similarly the "Respond to challenge" action
> should be plural ("Respond to challenge*s*") and should have a plural
> request "POST challenge url*s*". I think that will emphasize that there
> can be multiple authorizations in one order and multiple challenges in one
> authorization.
>
> Also the diagram seems to have a few issues:
>
>
> Agreed that we should capture the finalization step here & remove the
> "new-nonce"/"authz" inconsistencies.
>
> Sophie: Do you want to submit a PR implementing these changes?
>
> Thanks again!
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Sophie Herold <sophie_her...@hemio.de>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think there are two "mistakes" in this example:
>>
>> | Action               | Request             | Response        |
>> |:---------------------|:--------------------|:----------------|
>> | Get a nonce          | HEAD newNonce       | 204             |
>> | Create account       | POST newAccount     | 201 -> account  |
>> | Submit an order      | POST newOrder       | 201 -> order    |
>> | Fetch challenges     | GET  authz          | 200             |
>> | Respond to challenge | POST challenge      | 200             |
>> | Finalize order       | POST order finalize | 200             |
>> | Poll for status      | GET  authz          | 200             |
>> | Check for new cert   | GET  cert           | 200             |
>>
>> 1. "Poll for status" should not be "GET authz" but "GET order".
>>    Only if the order is "pending" or "invalid", authz are of interest.
>> 2. "Check for new cert": There is nothing to check here.
>>
>>
>> To avoid unnecessary confusion, I suggest that the table could look
>> something like this:
>>
>> | Action               | Request                  | Response       |
>> |:---------------------|:-------------------------|:---------------|
>> | Get directory        | GET  directory           | 200            |
>> | Get nonce            | HEAD newNonce            | 204            |
>> | Create account       | POST newAccount          | 201 -> account |
>> | Submit order         | POST newOrder            | 201 -> order   |
>> | Fetch challenges     | GET  order authorization | 200            |
>> | Respond to challenge | POST challenge url       | 200            |
>> | Finalize order       | POST order finalize      | 200            |
>> | Poll for status      | GET  order               | 200            |
>> | Download certificate | GET  order cert          | 200            |
>>
>>
>> Also the diagram seems to have a few issues:
>>
>> 1. new-nonce should be newNonce (my fault)
>> 2. should "finalize" appear somewhere? maybe like this?
>>     order -----> finalize
>>           -----> cert
>> 3. I think "authz" could be called authorization here
>>
>> Best,
>> Sophie
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list
Acme@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme

Reply via email to