> In reviewing a PR today noting that a client can find the account URI for > a key pair using a new-account request with an empty payload [1], Jacob > and I thought it might be a little more robust to use an explicit signal. > I've posted a PR that adds a "recovery" field to indicate to the server > that it should not create an account if one does not exist already. Which > is a little ironic in a request to an endpoint designed to create an > account, but saves us creating a whole new endpoint. > [1]https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/296 I don't think this should be called recovery. It's too reminiscent of the old removed account recovery mechanisms and will be confusing.
How about "existing": true? _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
