I think its an anti-pattern to standardize protocol features that haven't been implemented by anyone so here's a PR[0] for the Pebble ACME server that implements Richard's proposal[1] to establish viability. The proposal seems OK to me given the trade-offs/alternatives on the table.
I would encourage other ACME client/server developers to try their hand at implementing the changes from [1] as well. I've tested my PR with hand-rolled requests but not as part of an automated issuance process with a "real" ACME client. Speak now or forever hold your bugs. [0] - https://github.com/letsencrypt/pebble/pull/162 [1] - https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/445/files On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 1:21 PM, Richard Barnes <[email protected]> wrote: > No, if a server receives a GET request for a resource other than those > specified, then it MUST return 405. But please check out the PR and see if > it's clear there. > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 1:14 PM Salz, Rich <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> - * Servers MUST return a 405 if they get a GET for a resource other >> than directory/newNonce/certificate. >> >> >> >> They means client? Or there’s a word missing, and “they get a” is “they >> do not support” >> > > _______________________________________________ > Acme mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme > >
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
