As a general rule, any protocol that contains a component that may be subject to variation in the field needs an IANA registry. Since we are going to have multiple automatic validation processes we will be required to have a registry even if there is only one entry at first.
For the offline part, I don't think that the border between automatic and offline is quite as clear as some folk seem to think. Some validation mechanisms are intrinsically offline we have a proposal for a completely automatic one but virtually all the processes in use today are a mix of the two. Even EV issue can be automated if you have an already validate credential and a DV issue can return 'pending' for a host of reasons. And even if you are doing EV you have to pass domain validation as well. So I don't think this is a taxonomy thing. It is a 'label the process so the automatic bits can be identified' thing and a 'this may not work automatically' thing. So no to offline/xxxx but yes to a registry of validation schemes.
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
