The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8555,
"Automatic Certificate Management Environment (ACME)".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6030

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Matt Palmer <mp+i...@hezmatt.org>

Section: 7.2

Original Text
-------------
To get a fresh nonce, the client sends a HEAD request to the newNonce
resource on the server.  The server's response MUST include a Replay-
Nonce header field containing a fresh nonce and SHOULD have status
code 200 (OK).  The server MUST also respond to GET requests for this
resource, returning an empty body (while still providing a Replay-
Nonce header) with a status code of 204 (No Content).

Corrected Text
--------------
To get a fresh nonce, the client sends a HEAD request to the newNonce
resource on the server.  The server's response MUST include a Replay-
Nonce header field containing a fresh nonce and SHOULD have status
code 204 (No Content).  The server MUST also respond to GET requests for this
resource, returning an empty body (while still providing a Replay-
Nonce header) with a status code of 204 (No Content).

Notes
-----
RFC7321 s4.3.2, says "The server SHOULD send the same header fields in response 
to a HEAD request as it would have sent if the request had been a GET".  I 
can't see any rationale for violating this SHOULD in the discussion in the GH 
issue which introduced the discrepancy in response code between GET and HEAD 
(https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/371), thus (IMHO) it violates the 
tenets of a SHOULD, as "the full implications" do not appear to have "be[en] 
understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course" (RFC2119, 
of course).

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC8555 (draft-ietf-acme-acme-18)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Automatic Certificate Management Environment (ACME)
Publication Date    : March 2019
Author(s)           : R. Barnes, J. Hoffman-Andrews, D. McCarney, J. Kasten
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Automated Certificate Management Environment
Area                : Security
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list
Acme@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme

Reply via email to