> On Jan 11, 2018, at 19:49, Roland Bracewell Shoemaker 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> This seems like a silver bullet for the problems we’ve been seeing. Given 
> that blindly responding to an unknown ALPN value would be an RFC violation 
> this seems safe (although, hey, who knows what servers/cloud providers 
> actually do). Definitely interested in the results of the scan.

I’ve completed[0] a scan of the Alexa Top 1M list, and no servers repeated back 
the unknown ALPN protocol of “acme” that I used[1].

I also opened a PR that adds this change to the spec: 
https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/389

Jonathan

[0] https://storage.googleapis.com/titanous-acme/alpn_scan.csv.gz
[1] https://gist.github.com/titanous/8daa24ed3375f3c690950e8a97c7527d
_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme

Reply via email to