Definitely I agree that we could use the ACME WG's help in moving forward STIR/SHAKEN stuff that will rely on ACME. I kind of see these as joint ventures with the STIR work, as it requires some coordination with the things we're doing with certificates in STIR, and also with the kinds of PASSporTs that we want these certificates to sign. But the baseline mechanisms that acquire the certs need some attention from this group.
Jon Peterson Neustar, Inc. On 4/25/17, 3:54 PM, "Acme on behalf of Salz, Rich" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >> > So we submitted a draft to define a new challenge type to support the >> > ATIS/SIP Forum NNI task group (SHAKEN) requirements, which are based >>on >> > using protocols defined in STIR: > >> Would it make sense to move this forward in STIR? > >After some off-line email chat, I was wrong. ACME is the most reasonable >place for this. > >So new question. So far it seems unlikely we'll meet in Prague. But >would you be willing to talk about this if we do? Should we meet so that >we can talk about it (and CAA and any other things that come up?) > >-- >Senior Architect, Akamai Technologies >Member, OpenSSL Dev Team >IM: [email protected] Twitter: RichSalz >_______________________________________________ >Acme mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
