Any further objections to this? https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/167/files
On 08/09/2016 12:50 PM, Jacob Hoffman-Andrews wrote: > On 08/09/2016 12:42 PM, Ron wrote: >>> - If the CA uses legal auto-update language (most common case by far), >>> nothing else is required. >> >> I think in this case we should specify that the CA MUST notify the user >> of this via the ACME protocol (ie. by changing the ToS URL or similar). > > I'm fine with saying that the directory's terms-of-service URL should > always be up-to-date with the latest ToS, *if* the CA is using ACME for > ToS agreement. > > > I suspect for most paid CAs, ToS agreement will already have been > handled out-of-band, for instance when submitting payment information. > > _______________________________________________ > Acme mailing list > Acme@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme > _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list Acme@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
