Re: [Acme] Fw: About the ACME Protocol

I'd like to offer a general comment up front:From the standpoint of a maximally secure server and protocol, my attitude is to make the server smart, the client dumb, and the protocol minimal and unfriendly. When

Re: [Acme] Post-IETF-96 PRs

Two more: #165 - Re-add new-authz as pre-authorization https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/165 #166 - Clarify 'url' field processing https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/166 On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Richard Barnes wrote: > Hey all, > > I just posted several

Re: [Acme] Pre-authorization approach

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 5:52 AM, Ilari Liusvaara wrote: > On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 02:29:54PM -0700, Andrew Ayer wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 23:03:18 +0200 > > Richard Barnes wrote: > > > > > - Add an "identifiers" field to the application object > > > -

Re: [Acme] Schedule for WGLC (was Minutes and verifying some decisions)

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 11:32 PM, Ron wrote: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 08:24:13PM +, Salz, Rich wrote: > > * Request to the mailing list "hey, if you have a post-v1-WGLC, tell > > us or this may not exist further!" > > > > That last item deserves some more explanation. We