On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 06:25:26PM -0700, Jacob Hoffman-Andrews wrote: > Any further objections to this? > > https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/167/files
Aside from Eric's remarks, I'm also not too keen on a blanket "terms-of-service": "agreed", since there's no indication there of what you've actually "agreed" to. I don't think this should be a binary (unary?) switch. > 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 [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
