scale with the intent
of reducing network congestion, well... we need to reduce network
congestion rather than increase it.
Maybe there's even some combination of (A) and (B), for example utilizing a
new field on newOrders in combination with a batch ARI endpoint.
Thanks for your c
Hi all,
I don't normally participate in these mailing lists, and last time I did I
feel like the lack of discussion was discouraging, as what little
discussion did occur wasn't taken seriously and was laced with complacency.
Just stating up front that I don't have much hope for this message to be
That'll work - I like the idea of the meta field. No new operations seem
necessary if that is present.
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 3:28 PM Richard Barnes wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <
> d...@fifthhorseman.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thu 2015-11-
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 2:57 PM Daniel Kahn Gillmor
wrote:
> On Thu 2015-11-12 10:30:44 -0500, Matthew Holt wrote:
> > If the client leaves it up to the user to follow the link, then the
> format
> > shouldn't matter in terms of the ACME spec; it is up to the document
&g
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 7:06 PM Daniel Kahn Gillmor
wrote:
> Doesn't this depend on the nature of the data fetched at the given URL?
> I'd hope that any inclusion of some mechanism like this would be tightly
> constrained with guidance that makes the data both self-contained and
> immutable. Som
I'd like to propose a change that allows clients of the ACME protocol to
obtain the URL to the CA's current Terms of Service (if any) without
re-registering or trying to obtain a certificate and getting a failure
response.
This proposal has two parts: adding an entry to the directory, and adding
t
