On 01/11/2019 12:28 PM, John Levine wrote:
I use acme.sh which inserts them every time it renews the cert. I haven't
looked to see whether the record changes. Everything's automated and
the renewals start a while before the cert expires so if it flakes today,
it'll work tomorrow which has
In article
you write:
>> If I could give LE a hint about which NS to look at, the flakiness would
>> go away.
>
>How often do you need to update DNS records for Let's Encrypt?
I use acme.sh which inserts them every time it renews the cert. I
haven't looked to see whether the record changes.
On 01/11/2019 10:51 AM, John R Levine wrote:
In my case the problem is that I swap DNS secondary service with the ISP
down the road, and his name servers don't always pick up changes when I
poke it.
Nice trade.
If I could give LE a hint about which NS to look at, the flakiness would
go
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019, Ned Freed wrote:
From what I can tell there is no limit that would prevent you from maintaining
as many domains as you want, even in the presence of a 2% valiation failure
rate - a rate which, if I had it, I would consider unacceptable and would
consider fixing it a top
> In article <01r1svv1718u000...@mauve.mrochek.com> you write:
> >Agreed, but to be fair, there is a 500 domain per IP limit with Let's
> >Encrypt.
> >But 500 is a lot more than 80, and if you're servicing over 500 domains that
> >sounds like a fairly commercial enterprise to me, with all that
Hi,
The draft "Using EAP-TLS with TLS 1.3" (draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13-03) specifies
the use of EAP-TLS with TLS 1.3:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13
https://github.com/emu-wg/draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13
In Bangkok the EMU WG decided to analyse if some of the known attacks on
Hi Jim,
Below I removed comments where we are in agreement (or which we already
discussing separately). I will reply to a few remaining comments separately.
On 10/01/2019 19:48, Jim Fenton wrote:
Thanks for your review, Alexey. Responses and a few clarifying questions
below.
On 1/9/19 8:34
Hi Jim,
Very quick comment on just one point:
On 10/01/2019 19:48, Jim Fenton wrote:
Examples/ABNF, I had thought this was simple enough that these weren't
needed, but fair point, will add.
For new header fields it is important to show whether any CFWS are
allowed in values, so I prefer
