I take that back. Solve Sophie’s issue (from the other thread) first, and then publish a new draft.
> On 27 Dec 2017, at 6:46, Yoav Nir <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thank you for all who participated. > > There have been two editorial changes suggested and accepted in the GitHub > repository. As soon as a new draft is published, I think we can progress this. > > Thanks again. > > Yoav > >> On 14 Dec 2017, at 19:28, Yoav Nir <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> Draft-09 is now available and has (IMO) addressed all or the outstanding >> issues. >> >> This starts an abbreviated WGLC for this draft. Please review the draft and >> send in your comments by EOD Monday the 25th. Please note that Monday the >> 25th is Christmas day, so don’t delay - send in your comments sooner rather >> than later. >> >> If all goes well, we can go to IETF LC in early January and have this in the >> RFC Editor queue before the London meeting. >> >> Yoav >> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>> From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> Subject: [Acme] I-D Action: draft-ietf-acme-acme-09.txt >>> Date: 14 December 2017 at 16:14:02 GMT+2 >>> To: <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> Cc: [email protected] <mailto:[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 WG of the IETF. >>> >>> Title : Automatic Certificate Management Environment (ACME) >>> Authors : Richard Barnes >>> Jacob Hoffman-Andrews >>> Daniel McCarney >>> James Kasten >>> Filename : draft-ietf-acme-acme-09.txt >>> Pages : 80 >>> Date : 2017-12-14 >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> RFC EDITOR: PLEASE REMOVE THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH: The source for >>> this draft is maintained in GitHub. Suggested changes should be >>> submitted as pull requests at https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme >>> <https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme> >>> [1]. Instructions are on that page as well. Editorial changes can >>> be managed in GitHub, but any substantive change should be discussed >>> on the ACME mailing list ([email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>). >>> >>> >>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-acme/ >>> <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-09 >>> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-acme-acme-09> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-acme-acme-09 >>> >>> A diff from the previous version is available at: >>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-acme-acme-09 >>> >>> >>> 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 >> >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
