Re: [Acme] Happy Birthday ACME!

Hi, Rob The first question whenever someone proposes a bis document is, of course, “are you volunteering to edit?” Jokes aside, it’s always a question of whether or not it is worth the effort. Not just for whoever is editing, but the usual effort associated with any document, such as WG

Re: [Acme] ACME leadership changes

lations on your new AD role! Thank you for your leadership in > the WG. > > Yoav (Nir): Despite these transitions, thank you for your continued service > as co-chair in the WG! > > Deb isn't going too far from ACME. After the AD transition in Brisbane, the > responsible AD fo

[Acme] Interim Meeiting Minutes

Hi. I’ve posted the minutes to datatracker: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2021-acme-01/materials/minutes-interim-2021-acme-01-202109291400-00 Let me know if

Re: [Acme] Changes in ACME WG leadership team

Welcome aboard, Deb! > On 9 Jul 2021, at 19:26, Roman Danyliw wrote: > > Hi! > > To follow up on the announcement during IETF 109, after 6 years of leading > the ACME WG from the very first BoF, Rich will be stepping down as co-chair. > Under his stewardship, a working group was formed,

[Acme] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-04

Yoav Nir has requested publication of draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-04 as Proposed Standard on behalf of the ACME working group. Please verify the document's state at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid/ ___ Acme mailing list Acme

Re: [Acme] WGLC for ACME Integrations

be to tell teh authors that the WG doesn’t seem to care much for this, and advise them to turn to the ADs to ask to submit this as individuals. Yoav > On 31 Mar 2021, at 22:50, Yoav Nir wrote: > > Hi. > > This starts a WGLC for the subject draft entitled “ACME Integrations. The

Re: [Acme] WGLC for ACME DTN Node ID

Thanks to Russ Housley and Ryan Sleevi for the reviews. Thanks to the authors for the revised version. This is not a great showing in terms of quantity of review, but the quality is sufficient. I will write the shepherd write-up and submit. Yoav > On 31 Mar 2021, at 22:50, Yoav Nir wr

[Acme] WGLC for ACME DTN Node ID

Hi. This starts a WGLC for the subject draft entitled “Automated Certificate Management Environment (ACME) Delay-Tolerant Networking (DTN) Node ID Validation Extension”. The call will end at EOD Monday, April 19th, 2001. The document has been with the WG since last August, and has received too

[Acme] WGLC for ACME Integrations

Hi. This starts a WGLC for the subject draft entitled “ACME Integrations. The call will end at EOD Monday, April 19th, 2001. The document has been with the WG since last January, and has received some review. Following the closing of the last two issues, the authors believe and the sense of

[Acme] WGLC on draft-ietf-acme-star-delegation

Hello all This memo proposes a profile of the ACME protocol that allows the owner of an identifier (e.g., a domain name) to delegate to a third party access to a certificate associated with said identifier. A primary use case is that of a CDN (the third party) terminating TLS

[Acme] Meeting Materials Uploaded

Hi all, I’ve just uploaded the meeting materials for tomorrow’s session. https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/materials#acme If you’re presenting tomorrow, please check that your slides are there. See you all tomorrow. Yoav

[Acme] Holding a virtual interim meeting. Or not

Hi all. As you know, the in-person IETF meeting in Vancouver has been cancelled. There is a reduced schedule for virtual meetings [1], but that does not include ACME. The IESG chair has published a recommended schedule [2] for the working groups to hold virtual meetings in April instead of

Re: [Acme] IETF 107; agenda

I thought it was a possibility to have the week consist of all virtual > meetings. Or has that been totally removed from the table? Some of us like > that option as we've already blocked that week in our calendars. > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 3:07 PM Yoav Nir <mailto:yni

Re: [Acme] IETF 107; agenda

> On 9 Mar 2020, at 17:11, Salz, Rich wrote: > > Yaron and I cannot attend and will be remote. We have volunteers to act as > chairs for us (on CC). Looking at the list below, it seems reasonable to > cancel our session. PLEASE POST IF YOU DISAGREE. Of course "they" may > decide to

Re: [Acme] IETF 107; agenda

…and Yoav won’t be there either. No idea about Yaron. > On 9 Mar 2020, at 17:11, Salz, Rich wrote: > > Yaron and I cannot attend and will be remote. We have volunteers to act as > chairs for us (on CC). Looking at the list below, it seems reasonable to > cancel our session. PLEASE POST IF

[Acme] The session in Vancouver - Looking for a volunteer

Hi As it turns out, both Rich and I will not be able to attend IETF 107 due to company and government (in my case) restrictions on travel. For now we hope not to cancel the ACME session. Since neither of us is going to be on-site, we are looking for a volunteer to sling the slides, send

Re: [Acme] Slides for tomorrow.

It’s now past 11:00 PM and we still don’t have slides for telephony, TLS-ALPN, and STAR delegation. What’s up with that? Rich & Yoav > On 21 Jul 2019, at 12:19, Yoav Nir wrote: > > Hi, presenters. > > The meeting is tomorrow morning: > https://datatracker.ietf.org

[Acme] Slides for tomorrow.

Hi, presenters. The meeting is tomorrow morning: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/materials/agenda-105-acme Please send your slides by EOD today, and also tell me who will be presenting. We want to have the slides up

Re: [Acme] Agenda for IETF 105

igure > that out according to interest. > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moriarty-acme-overview-00 > <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moriarty-acme-overview-00> > > Best regards, > Kathleen > >> >> Thanks, >> Owen >> >>

Re: [Acme] IETF 104 Agenda

Hi Rifaat. We only have one hour in total.  It's about 5 minutes for the administrative stuff, another 10 for status and reconfirming STAR, and maybe 5-10 for status of other things. The rest (about 40 minutes) is for device attestation and client certs. ⁣Sent from my phone ​

Re: [Acme] RFC 8555 on Automatic Certificate Management Environment (ACME)

Starting work on the champagne & ticker-tape slide for the meeting. Thanks everyone for all the work. > On 11 Mar 2019, at 23:44, Richard Barnes wrote: > > Thanks to everyone for your work on this! > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 5:08 PM > wrote: > A new

Re: [Acme] New Version Notification for draft-yusef-acme-3rd-party-device-attestation-01.txt

> On 18 Jan 2019, at 1:20, Richard Barnes wrote: > > "Whatever you do, contemplate death" > — Seneca He must have been lots of fun at parties. Yoav ___ Acme mailing list Acme@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme

[Acme] ACME implementation (was: Re: Draft minutes)

[changing the subject] That’s great, Marcos. We currently don’t have a list of implementations. If you want, you can start one. Good places for such a list could be: The GitHub project wiki: https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/wiki or The tools wiki: https://trac.ietf.org/trac/acme If you

[Acme] Authority Token at today's meeting

Hi, all We have a slot on our agenda reserved for the authority token drafts ([1],[2]) Who is going to present? And please send the slides. If the authors do not intend to present, please at least send a status update to the list or the chairs. Thanks Rich & Yoav

Re: [Acme] high-value definition

High-value is not synonymous with a phishing site. If anything, it is a victim of phishing sites. Paypal.com and bankofamerica.com are high-value sites. paypaal.com and bank-of-america.com are

Re: [Acme] Question about finalizing an order

Hi Since you’re merging stuff, then please submit a new version of the draft ASAP. We *are* in IETF LC, and we wouldn’t want everyone to read an “old” version of the draft. Thanks Yoav > On 26 Mar 2018, at 17:52, Daniel McCarney wrote: > > PR #417 was merged. This

[Acme] Wednesday meeting - minutes uploaded

Thanks to PHB for taking the minutes https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/minutes-101-acme-00 Yoav___ Acme mailing list Acme@ietf.org

Re: [Acme] acme - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 101

Hi, folks So we are going to have a 1.5 hour session in London. Anyone who needs agenda time, please send a note to Rich and me. Hope to see you all there. Yoav > On 28 Feb 2018, at 1:11, IETF Secretariat <age...@ietf.org> wrote: > > Dear Yoav Nir, > > The session(s) th

Re: [Acme] YA WGLC for draft-ietf-acme-acme

; > Hi Yoav, > > There are a few threads on the go from Sophie. Is there one in particular you > mean to reference here? Both? > > Thanks! > > > On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 2:15 PM, Yoav Nir <ynir.i...@gmail.com > <mailto:ynir.i...@gmail.com>> wrote: > I tak

Re: [Acme] YA WGLC for draft-ietf-acme-acme

I take that back. Solve Sophie’s issue (from the other thread) first, and then publish a new draft. > On 27 Dec 2017, at 6:46, Yoav Nir <ynir.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thank you for all who participated. > > There have been two editorial changes suggested and a

Re: [Acme] YA WGLC for draft-ietf-acme-acme

Thank you for all who participated. There have been two editorial changes suggested and accepted in the GitHub repository. As soon as a new draft is published, I think we can progress this. Thanks again. Yoav > On 14 Dec 2017, at 19:28, Yoav Nir <ynir.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > >

[Acme] YA WGLC for draft-ietf-acme-acme

Hi Draft-09 is now available and has (IMO) addressed all or the outstanding issues. This starts an abbreviated WGLC for this draft. Please review the draft and send in your comments by EOD Monday the 25th. Please note that Monday the 25th is Christmas day, so don’t delay - send in your

[Acme] Slides for Thursday (was Re: Slides for the meeting tomorrow)

gt; > On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 9:56 PM, Yoav Nir <ynir.i...@gmail.com > <mailto:ynir.i...@gmail.com>> wrote: > Hi. > > Those people presenting tomorrow who have not yet sent us the slides, please > do so today. > &

[Acme] Slides for the meeting tomorrow

Hi. Those people presenting tomorrow who have not yet sent us the slides, please do so today. You know who you are. Thanks, Rich and Yoav signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP ___ Acme mailing list Acme@ietf.org

Re: [Acme] Draft Agenda Uploaded

was editorial unless there is > any further thoughts on the technical aspects I’d be interested in seeing if > there is consensus for moving this towards LC. Given it’s a pretty simple > document this shouldn’t take much time. > >> On Oct 29, 2017, at 12:20 PM, Yoav Nir &l

[Acme] Draft Agenda Uploaded

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/100/materials/agenda-100-acme/ If anything’s missing, please let us know really soon. Thanks Rich and Yoav signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: [Acme] Minutes from IEtf 99

t.org> wrote: > > The real minutes are what we will upload in a few days or weeks, and they are > usually in plaintext form. > > Hi Yoav, > > Have the real minutes been shared anywhere? > > Thanks! > > > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Yoav Nir <ynir.i...@

Re: [Acme] Friday's meeting

> On 18 Jul 2017, at 14:23, Yoav Nir <ynir.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi again. > > We have a jabber scribe. Still need a minutes taker. Praise will be heaped. > Gifts will be bestowed. Folks, we still need a volunteer for minutes taker. We can’t run a meeting without

Re: [Acme] Friday's meeting

Hi again. We have a jabber scribe. Still need a minutes taker. Praise will be heaped. Gifts will be bestowed. Some presentations are still missing. Please send them soon and with slide numbers. > On 17 Jul 2017, at 13:01, Yoav Nir <ynir.i...@gmail.com> wrote: >

Re: [Acme] draft minutes from june 2 interim

Slight correction On 2 Jun 2017, at 22:36, Salz, Rich wrote: > > >> In addition, Alexey is interested in helping with an ACME challenge for >> email certificates. Is anyone else interested in helping to draft drafting? > > Alex posted a draft just before the meeting.

Re: [Acme] ACME interm meeting poll

> On 9 May 2017, at 23:28, Salz, Rich wrote: > In addition, Alexey is interested in helping with an ACME challenge for email > certificates. Is anyone else interested in helping to draft drafting? Has there been anything about this on the list? Anyway, I’d be happy to

Re: [Acme] Server on >= 1024 port

> On 2 Dec 2015, at 11:52 AM, Paul Millar wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm writing just to summarise this thread and check a consensus has been > reached. > > On 25/11/15 11:13, Paul Millar wrote: >> I was wondering whether people have considered services running on a >> port

Re: [Acme] Server on >= 1024 port

> On 26 Nov 2015, at 11:49 AM, Paul Millar wrote: > > On 25/11/15 19:22, Roland Zink wrote: >> The resolution of a certificate is the domain name, e.g. it is valid for >> all services on the machine. If you get the certificate for a port then >> you may misuse it to

Re: [Acme] Server on >= 1024 port

> On 26 Nov 2015, at 1:16 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > >> The resolution of a certificate is the domain name, e.g. it is valid for >> all services on the machine. > >X509v3 extensions: >X509v3 Key Usage: critical >Digital Signature, Key

Re: [Acme] Issue: Allow ports other than 443

> On 26 Nov 2015, at 1:00 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > > > On 26/11/15 08:36, Eliot Lear wrote: >> Yes. The real issue here is that the cert contains the hostname and not >> the port. > > So one could define a new always-critical certificate extension > saying

Re: [Acme] Issue: Allow ports other than 443

I think Eliot meant RFC 5785 /.well-known/ locations, rather than well known ports Yoav > On 24 Nov 2015, at 6:37 PM, Kathleen Moriarty > wrote: > > I agree with Eliot, I don't think a scan is needed to make a decision > here. Having managed several

Re: [Acme] New issue: Clarify how to handle bad requests

> On 21 Nov 2015, at 8:02 PM, Salz, Rich wrote: > > Please see https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/issues/47 for background, but > discuss it here on the mailing list. The A in ACME stands for automated, and the protocol we are chartered to develop is designed to allow

Re: [Acme] Spec change to allow retrieval of Terms of Service URL

> On 12 Nov 2015, at 4:06 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor > wrote: > > On Fri 2015-11-06 14:03:35 -0500, Matthew Holt wrote: >> I'd like to propose a change that allows clients of the ACME protocol to >> obtain the URL to the CA's current Terms of Service (if any) without >>