Re: [Acme] AD Review: draft-ietf-acme-caa-05

2018-12-28 Thread Hugo Landau
On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 03:23:35AM +, Salz, Rich wrote: > > + Validation methods beginning with the prefix "ca-" are reserved for > CA-local > + meaning and may not be registered. > > "need not be" ? Or "SHOULD NOT be" ? My intention was that the rules of the registry state

Re: [Acme] AD Review: draft-ietf-acme-caa-05

2018-12-28 Thread Salz, Rich
+ Validation methods beginning with the prefix "ca-" are reserved for CA-local + meaning and may not be registered. "need not be" ? Or "SHOULD NOT be" ? >I think that about does it? Looks good to me. ___ Acme mailing list

Re: [Acme] AD Review: draft-ietf-acme-caa-05

2018-12-28 Thread Hugo Landau
> Would like to see proposed wording, but the concept seems fine. How about, changes marked: Validation methods do not have to be compatible with ACME in order to be registered. For example, a CA might wish to register a validation method in order to support its use with the ACME