Hi Richard,

Take a look at the following exchange with Jacob:
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/acme/current/msg02085.html


I think the draft should be clear on the response when the server reuses
existing pending authorization:
1. Is it still 201 Created? or should it be 200 OK?
2. Would the payload include the "challenges" object as per the response to
the /new-authz request, or would the payload still include the
"authorization" object as per the response to the /new-order?

Regards,
 Rifaat




On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Richard Barnes <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef <[email protected]
> > wrote:
>
>> I do not believe that I got an answer to my pre-authorization question
>> here:
>> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/acme/current/msg01991.html
>>
>> What would be the response of the server if the client sends the
>> certificate issuance request after it sends the pre-authorization request
>> but
>> before it completes the pre-authorization process?
>>
>> Would the server reply with the same challenges it provided in the
>> response to the pre-authorization request?
>>
>
> Hey Rifaat,
>
> Sorry for missing this.  I think the short answer is that it's up to the
> server.  Either way, the server is instructing the client to fulfill
> certain instructions.  I don't think this really needs much specification;
> the most would be a recommendation that the server should re-use existing
> pending challenges.
>
> --Richard
>
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>  Rifaat
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Ted Hardie <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Howdy,
>>>
>>> We'd like to start a short working group last call on the changes made
>>> in response to the previous last call.  It will end June 28th, 2017, any
>>> time zone (to accommodate any changes needed before the draft deadline the
>>> following Monday).
>>>
>>> Please review carefully, but please respect the discussion which have
>>> already been held by focusing on new issues or new information about the
>>> issues that have been resolved.
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>>
>>> Ted, Rich, (and now) Yoav
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: <[email protected]>
>>> Date: Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 12:00 PM
>>> Subject: [Acme] I-D Action: draft-ietf-acme-acme-07.txt
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>>> directories.
>>> This draft is a work item of the Automated Certificate Management
>>> Environment of the IETF.
>>>
>>>         Title           : Automatic Certificate Management Environment
>>> (ACME)
>>>         Authors         : Richard Barnes
>>>                           Jacob Hoffman-Andrews
>>>                           James Kasten
>>>         Filename        : draft-ietf-acme-acme-07.txt
>>>         Pages           : 74
>>>         Date            : 2017-06-21
>>>
>>> Abstract:
>>>    Certificates in PKI using X.509 (PKIX) are used for a number of
>>>    purposes, the most significant of which is the authentication of
>>>    domain names.  Thus, certificate authorities in the Web PKI are
>>>    trusted to verify that an applicant for a certificate legitimately
>>>    represents the domain name(s) in the certificate.  Today, this
>>>    verification is done through a collection of ad hoc mechanisms.  This
>>>    document describes a protocol that a certification authority (CA) and
>>>    an applicant can use to automate the process of verification and
>>>    certificate issuance.  The protocol also provides facilities for
>>>    other certificate management functions, such as certificate
>>>    revocation.
>>>
>>>
>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-acme/
>>>
>>> There are also htmlized versions available at:
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-acme-acme-07
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-acme-acme-07
>>>
>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-acme-acme-07
>>>
>>>
>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>>> submission
>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>>>
>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Acme mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Acme mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Acme mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme

Reply via email to