I agree with MT here. We should just name it v1. That's what IETF change
control means

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Martin Thomson <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I don't see the distinction between what LE deploy and ACME as defined
> by the IETF being any different to the distinction between whatever
> any other CA currently deploy and the IETF spec.  It's a thing that
> exists, but I see no reason to accord the LE proprietary protocol any
> special status other than by acknowledging provenance.
>
> This is the IETF version of ACME, and as such it needs no version
> qualification.  I doubt that there will be any confusion from this
> being deployed alongside the proprietary LE protocol.
>
> On 13 June 2017 at 16:26, Richard Barnes <[email protected]> wrote:
> > (Everyone get your bike shed paint out....)
> >
> > In talking with a few folks around the community, I've heard people
> refer to
> > the IETF version of ACME as "v2", where implicitly "v1" is the initial
> > version deployed by Let's Encrypt and its clients right now.
> >
> > How would people feel about reflecting this in the draft / RFC?  I've
> posted
> > a PR with the changes this would entail:
> >
> > https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/321
> >
> > The only question this raises for me is what to do about v1.  Given that
> > Let's Encrypt has evolved their interface some since the first version,
> I'm
> > not sure there's one consolidated spec out there for what they currently
> > have deployed.  So while it would be nice to have a reference to v1 in
> this
> > document if we make it v2, I'm not inclined to worry about it too much.
> I'm
> > willing to leave it up to the LE folks if they want to submit a v1 later
> for
> > historical purposes.
> >
> > Any objections to merging the above PR?
> >
> > --Richard
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Acme mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Acme mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
>
_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme

Reply via email to