Re: [Acme] [EXT] I-D Action: draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-14.txt

2024-03-25 Thread Sipos, Brian J.
All, These last edits represent the final changes expected for this draft. The -13 revision was for changes caught by reviewers and the -14 was one citation typo that I caught during my own review. The companion document [1] is undergoing AD review and should eventually be in the IESG review at

Re: [Acme] [EXT] I-D Action: draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-12.txt

2024-01-12 Thread Sipos, Brian J.
Chairs specifically, This last revision of the DTN Node ID Validation doc adds some clarifying text to further address earlier IESG comments and to remove a non-normative reference to a DTN WG document not being actively edited (for BIBE). This document should be ready for WG review and further

Re: [Acme] [EXT] I-D Action: draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-11.txt

2023-08-02 Thread Sipos, Brian J.
Chairs, This document revision updates references to the most recent internet drafts, including the just-past WG last call IANA registry creating document [1], as discussed at the last IETF. I also removed non-normative text mentioning "multicast" so that there is no confusion or implied

Re: [Acme] [EXT] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-09.txt

2022-05-24 Thread Sipos, Brian J.
All, I haven’t seen any reviews of the last draft version -09. I hope that the closer alignment with RFC 8823 makes its understanding and analysis easier. From: Acme On Behalf Of Deb Cooley Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 7:39 AM To: IETF ACME ; Brian Sipos Cc: Roman Danyliw ; Dorothy E Cooley

Re: [Acme] draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid-07 issue

2021-11-29 Thread Sipos, Brian J.
All, It appears that there is a logical issue in the current Node ID Validation draft [1]; I had incorrectly assumed that the current three inputs of the Key Authorization (token-chal, token-bundle, client account key thumbprint) provide proof of access to both the validated BP channel and the