Hi Chunchi，Mike, and all, I fully support the adoption of draft-liu-acme-rats-02 within the ACME working group.
Remote attestation can enhance the security and trustworthiness of certificate management, especially in the cloud and distributed environments. The draft provides a well-structured extension to ACME that enables meaningful integration with the attestation technologies, and I believe it addresses an important need. Best regards. Haiguang ________________________________ From: Liuchunchi(Peter) <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, 5 December 2025 9:34 AM To: Mike Ounsworth; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [Acme] Re: Call for adoption: draft-liu-acme-rats-02 (Ends 2025-12-10) As an author, I support adoption. Also, I will prepare an initial POC implementation to present at the next IETF for ACME client. The current codebase is https://github.com/go-acme/lego, but do let me know if there are better options. Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Ounsworth via Datatracker <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2025 8:39 AM > To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Call for adoption: draft-liu-acme-rats-02 (Ends 2025-12-10) > > > Subject: Call for adoption: draft-liu-acme-rats-02 (Ends 2025-12-10) > > This message starts a 2-week Call for Adoption for this document. > > Abstract: > This document describes an approach where an ACME Server can > challenge an ACME Client to provide a Remote Attestation Evidence or > Remote Attestation Result in any format supported by the Conceptual > Message Wrapper. > > The ACME Server can optionally challenge the Client for specific > claims that it wishes attestation for. > > File can be retrieved from: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-acme-rats/ > > Please reply to this message keeping [email protected] in copy by indicating > whether you support or not the adoption of this draft as a WG document. > Comments to motivate your preference are highly appreciated. > > Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual > Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [2]. > Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions > of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any. > Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be > found > at [3]. > > Thank you. > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/ > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/ > [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/ > > _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
