I note (and thanks for the heads-up, Ben) that there's new ABNF in Section 4 of this version. I have a DISCUSS-level question on it.
The ABNF allows for the value of "validationmethods" to be empty, but the first paragraph of Section 4 says, "The value of this parameter, if specified, MUST be a comma-separated string of validation method labels," which implies that it can't be empty. Which is intended? If it's mean to be allowed to be empty, please change the text to make that clear. If not, then please remove the square-brackets on the ABNF for "value"; that will make it require at least one label. Thanks, Barry On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:10 PM Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <[email protected]> wrote: > > Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-acme-caa-09: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-caa/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks for addressing my Discuss (and Comment!) points! > > While adding the discussion of the privacy considerations of publishing > account URLs > suffices to clear my discuss point, I will mention that if we wanted to > obscure or anonymize > the published information relating to specific account, there are pretty > standard ways to > do so and I'm happy to talk about it if that's desired. > > _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
