Dear ACME,

We need to get some eyes on this draft - draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid.  If you
have time, please take a look and let us know whether you think it is ready
(or make comments).  We are hoping to get this draft finished!

Deb Cooley

On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 5:29 PM Sipos, Brian J. <[email protected]>
wrote:

> All,
>
> I haven’t seen any reviews of the last draft version -09. I hope that the
> closer alignment with RFC 8823 makes its understanding and analysis easier.
>
>
>
> *From:* Acme <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Deb Cooley
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 24, 2022 7:39 AM
> *To:* IETF ACME <[email protected]>; Brian Sipos <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* Roman Danyliw <[email protected]>; Dorothy E Cooley <
> [email protected]>
> *Subject:* [EXT] Re: [Acme] I-D Action: draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-09.txt
>
>
>
> *APL external email warning: *Verify sender [email protected] before
> clicking links or attachments
>
>
>
> Did we ever get reviews on the updated draft?  If not, can we get some (or
> revive the) volunteers?
>
>
>
> Deb Cooley
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 7:12 AM Deb Cooley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> It is on the agenda.  We will ask for volunteers to review.
>
>
>
> Deb
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 5:29 PM Roman Danyliw <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
>
>
> We’re past IETF LC in terms of document processing and -08 and -09 appear
> to have changed protocol behavior.  Since there hasn’t been any discussion
> about this on the mailing list yet, I’d like to ask the WG to review these
> changes (
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-07&url2=draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-09).
> Please raise any objections by Friday April 1.
>
>
>
> Helpfully, this document is on the ACME meeting agenda tomorrow at IETF
> 113.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Roman
>
>
>
> *From:* Acme <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Brian Sipos
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 2, 2022 11:27 PM
> *To:* IETF ACME <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: [Acme] I-D Action: draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-09.txt
>
>
>
> All,
>
> I have posted an update to the Node ID Validation document which updates
> references to now-published DTN RFCs (yay!) and adds algorithm agility for
> the Key Authorization Digest to avoid the validation method being stuck on
> SHA-256. It does add a publication dependency on the COSE hash document,
> but that is in AUTH48 (though it's been stuck in that state for some time
> now).
>
> Comments are welcome and can be discussed at the next IETF.
>
> Brian S.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 7:35 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> 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           : Automated Certificate Management Environment
> (ACME) Delay-Tolerant Networking (DTN) Node ID Validation Extension
>         Author          : Brian Sipos
>         Filename        : draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-09.txt
>         Pages           : 31
>         Date            : 2022-03-02
>
> Abstract:
>    This document specifies an extension to the Automated Certificate
>    Management Environment (ACME) protocol which allows an ACME server to
>    validate the Delay-Tolerant Networking (DTN) Node ID for an ACME
>    client.  The DTN Node ID is encoded as a certificate Subject
>    Alternative Name (SAN) of type otherName with a name form of
>    BundleEID and as an ACME Identifier type "bundleEID".
>
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid/
>
> There is also an HTML version available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-09.html
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-09
>
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.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

Reply via email to