+1, will do.
> On Aug 15, 2018, at 12:54 PM, Russ Housley wrote:
>
> Roland:
>
> Thanks for the update. In addition to the changes that I requested, you
> added:
>
> The extnValue of the id-pe-acmeIdentifier extension is the ASN.1 DER
> encoding of the Authorization structure.
>
>
Roland:
Thanks for the update. In addition to the changes that I requested, you added:
The extnValue of the id-pe-acmeIdentifier extension is the ASN.1 DER
encoding of the Authorization structure.
Authorization is just an OCTET STRING. For clarity, it might be useful to say:
The
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 : ACME TLS ALPN Challenge Extension
Author : Roland Bracewell Shoemaker
A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Rich Salz, a Chair of
the acme working group.
-
Working Group Name: Automated Certificate Management Environment
Area Name: Security Area
Session Requester: Rich Salz
Number of
We have three documents that are in WG last call. All should be ready for
advancing to the IESG. The one open issue is about OID assignment for
draft-ietf-acme-tls-alpn-03. Russ has made an assignment that differs from the
current draft in that it avoids an extra sub-arc. Can the authors
One additional point. The same IANA process would be used to get object
identifiers for subsequent versions. The difference is which table the value
comes from.
Russ
> On Aug 15, 2018, at 11:10 AM, Richard Barnes wrote:
>
> I don't really think it matters much who's going to make a new
I don't really think it matters much who's going to make a new version.
The only difference here is whether you go back to IANA to get a new code
point. Given that the IANA process is not onerous, it seems like the extra
couple of octets are not really adding anything here. So I'm inclined to
do
