Hi Roland! > -----Original Message----- > From: Roland Shoemaker [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 3:08 PM > To: Roman Danyliw <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Acme] Second AD Review: draft-ietf-acme-tls-alpn > > Hey Roman, > > I’ve address most of the comments below and have a draft of the changes > here: https://github.com/rolandshoemaker/acme-tls-alpn/compare/in- > proc?w=1 > > There are a few comments I’m not sure I agree with which I’ve responded to > inline below, if this all looks good to you I’ll push up a new numbered draft. > > Thanks! > > > On Jun 21, 2019, at 4:57 AM, Roman Danyliw <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > I conducted as second AD review of draft-ietf-acme-tls-apln per the AD > hand-off. I have the following feedback/questions: > > > > ** Please address the issues from AD Review #1 and update the text as > discussed on the ML (specifically about Section 3 and Section 6): > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/LQ- > _rdrH5xVSxW64T7w3LONZ1RM > > > > > ** Section 3. (My ASN.1 foo is lacking but ...) Per the ASN.1 format of > acmeIdentifier, where is id-pe defined? The descriptive text mentions an > "extnValue" in the "id-pe-acmeIdentifier extension" where is that defined? > > Both id-pe and extnValue are defined in RFC 5280. I’ve added some > clarifying text to the draft.
Got it. The text works for me. > > > > ** Section 3 and Section 3.1. Per: > > > > Section 3: Once the TLS handshake has been completed the connection > MUST be immediately closed and no further data should be exchanged. > > Vs. > > Section 3.1: Once the handshake is completed the client MUST NOT > exchange any further data with the server and MUST immediately close the > connection. > > > > Why does Section 3 and 3.1 provide slightly different normative language > about closing the TLS connections and not exchanging data. I don't think we > need both. The updated text works for me. Thanks. > > ** Section 4. The Security Considerations of RFC8555 hold too. Thanks for adding the reference. > > Below is additional editorial feedback: > > > > ** Section 3. The list of fields, type and token, doesn't follow from the > introductory sentence. Provide some transition and introduction on the > presence of those fields. > > > > ** Section 3. Cite the base64url alphabet. Thanks. > > ** Section 3. The purpose of the two HTTP blob isn't made clear; they > aren't referenced in the text; and don't have a figure number. > > This follows the challenge definition format in 8555, I agree the GET blob > doesn’t really make sense and have removed it, but I think the POST is > appropriate and is referenced in both the preceding and following text. Concur that this text uses a similar style to RFC8555. FWIW, I found this format confusing. I can agree to disagree on this editorial point. > > ** Section 3. Specify that that the format is acmeIdentifier ASN.1 as: > > [X680] ITU-T, "Information technology -- Abstract Syntax Notation > > One (ASN.1): Specification of basic notation", > > ITU-T Recommendation X.680, 2015. > > > > ** Section 3. Cite ASN.1 DER encoding as: > > [X690] ITU-T, "Information Technology -- ASN.1 encoding rules: > > Specification of Basic Encoding Rules (BER), Canonical > > Encoding Rules (CER) and Distinguished Encoding Rules > > (DER)", ITU-T Recommendation X.690, 2015. > > > > ** Section 3. Cite "SNI extension" (RFC6066) on first use Thanks for these changes > > ** Section 3. Step 4. Per "Verify that the ServerHello", consider > > re-writing > this sentence so it doesn't use "contains" five times. This whole numbers section is now clearer. Thanks. > > ** Section 3. Step 4. Typo (missing period). > > s/Note that as ACME doesn't support Unicode identifiers all dNSNames > MUST be encoded using the [RFC3492] rules./Note that as ACME doesn't > support Unicode identifiers. All dNSNames MUST be encoded using the > [RFC3492] rules. > > I don’t think splitting this sentence makes sense, both sections rely on each > other. No problem. > > > > ** Section 7. Typo. s/specication/specification/ Thanks. Roman > > Roman > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Acme mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
