Hi Corey, On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 17:55:59 +0000 Corey Bonnell <Corey.Bonnell=40digicert....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> Hi Andrew, > Is the purpose of the "revocationTime" field such that ACME client > behavior would be different than the recommended replacement > time-selection algorithm in section 4.1, or is it to provide richer > metadata about the pending replacement window that is potentially > human or machine-readable? It is the latter - to provide richer metadata about why the window is what it is. ACME client behavior would not be affected. > If the latter, I'm wondering if we could consider defining a RFC > 7807-style "problem document" format that would provide fuller > information that is both human- and machine-readable. The > "explanationURL" field as it currently exists in the draft might be > useful for conveying human-readable information, but defining a > fuller representation of replacement-related metadata would also > allow machine-readable information to be conveyed. That could potentially be useful. Do you have any other information in mind that would be included? Regards, Andrew _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list Acme@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
