Re: [Acme] ACME wildcards vs. subdomain authorizations (was RE: Call for adoption draft-frield-acme-subdomains)

At 13:04 21/01/2020 Tuesday, Ryan Sleevi wrote: >On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 7:14 AM Owen Friel (ofriel) ><ofr...@cisco.com> wrote: >> Also, the linked document states: >> >>Â Â The call flow illustrates the DNS-based proof of ownership mechanism, >>Â Â but the

Re: [Acme] ACME wildcards vs. subdomain authorizations (was RE: Call for adoption draft-frield-acme-subdomains)

> On Jan 21, 2020, at 8:04 AM, Ryan Sleevi wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 7:14 AM Owen Friel (ofriel) wrote: > > Also, the linked document states: > > > >The call flow illustrates the DNS-based proof of ownership mechanism, > >but the subdomain workflow is equally valid for HTTP

Re: [Acme] ACME wildcards vs. subdomain authorizations (was RE: Call for adoption draft-frield-acme-subdomains)

> On Jan 21, 2020, at 7:13 AM, Owen Friel (ofriel) wrote: > >> >> Will this document eventually also describe subdomain authz via the standard >> ACME workflow? >> >> > > [ofriel] That’s the exact workflow that the document is attempting to > describe, so maybe it needs to be clarified. >

Re: [Acme] ACME wildcards vs. subdomain authorizations (was RE: Call for adoption draft-frield-acme-subdomains)

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 7:14 AM Owen Friel (ofriel) wrote: > > Also, the linked document states: > > > >The call flow illustrates the DNS-based proof of ownership mechanism, > >but the subdomain workflow is equally valid for HTTP based proof of > >ownership. > > > > Can’t I have HTTP

Re: [Acme] ACME wildcards vs. subdomain authorizations (was RE: Call for adoption draft-frield-acme-subdomains)

> -Original Message- > From: Acme On Behalf Of Felipe Gasper > Sent: 20 January 2020 12:32 > To: IETF ACME > Subject: Re: [Acme] ACME wildcards vs. subdomain authorizations (was RE: Call > for adoption draft-frield-acme-subdomains) > > Will this document eventually also describe