Hi Dale,
Thanks for the review. Responses inline below; changes in this PR:
https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/424
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 9:03 PM, Dale Worley wrote:
> Reviewer: Dale Worley
> Review result: Ready with Issues
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The
Hi Dale,
Thanks for the review. Responses inline below; changes in this PR:
https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/424
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 9:03 PM, Dale Worley wrote:
> Reviewer: Dale Worley
> Review result: Ready with Issues
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The
Hi,
On 24/04/18 17:30, Richard Barnes wrote:
>> 8.3. HTTP Challenge
>>
>>On receiving a response, the server constructs and stores the key
>>authorization from the challenge "token" value and the current client
>>account key.
>>
>> I'm not sure this storage step is necessary, or even
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Automated Certificate Management Environment
WG of the IETF.
Title : Automatic Certificate Management Environment (ACME)
Authors : Richard Barnes
Richard Barnes writes:
> [...]
> In other words, there's no need for version negotiation in-band to the
> protocol.
Yeah, that makes sense.
>> The handling of "terms of service agreement" seems to be insufficient,
>> [...]
>
> This mechanism has been reviewed by multiple CAs and found to be suff
