A few more comments:

Thinking some more, I realized that in addition to explicitly considering how 
issuewild works with this, we also need to consider issueemail.  This does 
bring up the question of whether these are better as parameters of the various 
issue tags, or whether we’re better off separating this out into a new 
"acme-discovery” tag that can be applied across all issuance types.  There are 
pros and cons.  The parameter method makes it easier to be able to have 
different issuance policies for web and email, which is the entire reason we 
have separate tags for each.  But I think it’s likely the same server is going 
to get populated for all the tags, leading to redundancy and potential 
maintenance issues keeping them in sync.  Or perhaps there’s both a global 
setting and parameters, although then you get a lot of additional complexity 
that probably isn’t worth it.  On balance, my gut feeling is that parameters 
that are handled uniformly across all three issuance tags is probably the best 
solution, but it could use more discussion and analysis I think.  So I wanted 
to bring it up.

The other question that occurred to me last night is since this draft is 
largely about CAA records and tags, and only linked to the ACME protocol itself 
in its motivation, LAMPS might actually be a better home for the draft, so it 
lives in the same WG as all the other CAA documents and registries.  But I 
don’t have strong feelings about that and if people want to continue discussing 
it at ACME instead, because that’s the motivating use case, I’m fine with that 
too.

-Tim

From: Acme <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Paul van Brouwershaven
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2023 5:07 AM
To: Seo Suchan <[email protected]>; Tim Hollebeek <[email protected]>; 
Mike Ounsworth <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Acme] [EXTERNAL] New Version Notification for 
draft-vanbrouwershaven-acme-auto-discovery-00.txt

> so It would mean all of parameter definitions can be applied to issuewild 
> too, and if there is only they will be considered?

Yes, the regular CAA selection MUST be followed, or the CA might not be 
authorized to issue the certificate after all.

The parameters can be applied to any CAA property (issue, issuewild, vmc, 
issuemail, etc.) as long as the ACME client supports the protocol, and the CA 
supports the issuance.

________________________________
From: Seo Suchan <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2023 09:54
To: Paul van Brouwershaven 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 
Tim Hollebeek <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 
Tim Hollebeek <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 
Mike Ounsworth <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [Acme] [EXTERNAL] New Version Notification for 
draft-vanbrouwershaven-acme-auto-discovery-00.txt


so It would mean all of parameter definitions can be applied to issuewild too, 
and if there is only they will be considered?
2023-07-13 오후 4:47에 Paul van Brouwershaven 이(가) 쓴 글:
3.1.1. recommend clarifying the extent to which case matters.  How should
"TRUE" or "True" be handled?
The document now specifies that this must be a lower-case Boolean
4-5. This is WAY in the weeds, and possibly should just be ignored, but
there's actually no requirement that the CA is able to host content at
the domain specified in the CAA tag.  At a minimum, they're only required
to have permission from the domain owner (RFC 8659, first paragraph,
item 2, second clause).  This might actually even happen due to
acquisitions.  In such situations, a CA might actually be unable to host
content on a .well-known URL for a tag it uses.
CAs could instruct the user to use a new CAA issuer-domain and they pro
Any email and files/attachments transmitted with it are intended solely for the 
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If this message has 
been sent to you in error, you must not copy, distribute or disclose of the 
information it contains. Please notify Entrust immediately and delete the 
message from your system.
_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme

Reply via email to