> RFC8555 already addresses wildcards, no?
Yes, wildcards are suppoted in RFC8555.
Meanwhile, there are no mentions of wildcards in draft-ietf-acme-subdomains-06.
It seems that wildcard certificates are not suitable for the subdomain scenario.
However, I think the wildcard certificate is another
All,
This is an I-D I've been working on sporadically to address trusted certificate
generation for IoT devices like printers, cameras, etc. As indicated in the
abstract, it enables discovery and usage of a local ACME server that provides a
trusted root certificate for the local network as
messaging both lamps and acme working group as while rfc8657 what I
propose will make outside scope of ACME WG:
while RFC8657 uses allows non-acme CAs use self-defined validation
method with ca-xxx prefix, as CAs are already have binding
classification from allowed validation methods, I think
