OK, thanks all.  On balance, feedback here seems OK, so I'm going to go
ahead and merge.  We can look at adding back some sort of PoP / recovery,
but I agree with Jacob that these are better un-spec'ed for the moment.

On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Richard Barnes <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> I've published a two PRs that I think should be non-controversial, but
> they're significant enough that I wanted to run them by the group.  I would
> appreciate it if you could take a look and give a quick thumbs up / thumbs
> down in Github (at the indicated URIs).  If you have any substantive
> comments, please reply in this thread.
>
> #101 Remove proof-of-possession challenge
> https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/101
>
> #102 Replace in-band account recovery with `meta`
> https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/102
>
> I'm happy to hold any of these if they need more discussion, but if
> there's no disagreement before the I-D deadline at midnight UTC, I'll go
> ahead and merge them before I post -02.
>
> Thanks,
> --Richard
>
>
_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme

Reply via email to