On 06/13/2016 04:27 AM, Richard Barnes wrote:
> Jacob: Could you clarify whether you think there's a substantive issue
> here, or just a process issue?
Substantive. I restarted the conversation on the earlier thread about this.
___
Acme mailing list
I agree with Niklas that this extension seems harmless. It seems like we
could make it safe to ignore just by tweaking the verification rules so
that the server is only required to check the containment if it's going to
use the "address" field as a guide.
Jacob: Could you clarify whether you
2016-06-09 19:12 GMT+02:00 Jacob Hoffman-Andrews :
> https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/138
>
> This reverts commit a5cb357
>
> I think we did not reach consensus on the list about this feature.
>
What's the issue with it? I think it's fine. It saves setting up redirects
to
https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/138
This reverts commit a5cb357
I think we did not reach consensus on the list about this feature.
___
Acme mailing list
Acme@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme