I would prefer we stick with dropping the version number, just because it's cleaner and the future is bigger than the past.
On Mar 13, 2017 2:27 PM, "Jacob Hoffman-Andrews" <[email protected]> wrote: > Roland posted a PR tweaking the challenge names for the final RFC: > https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/272. > > This raised the question: What do we want the challenge names to be in > the final RFC? I think we've been assuming that "http-01" would become > "http" once the RFC is published. However, this does create a slightly > deployment headache, in that draft-compatible implementations have to > use one name, and RFC-compatible implementations have to use another, so > it's hard to test working code with the final names before the RFC is > really finalized. > > I don't have a strong opinion on this one way or another. What do folks > on this list think? > > _______________________________________________ > Acme mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme >
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
