-----Original Message-----
From: Acme <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
Sent: 10 March 2020 05:47
To: Salz, Rich <[email protected]>
Cc: Alexey Melnikov <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Mary Barnes
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Acme] IETF 107; agenda
> draft-ietf-acme-integrations-00, ACME Integrations
> Michael Richardson can present.
I was given some slides (wasn't I Owen? Or did you just say that you'd send
some), and the major item was to clarify the changes that were made based
comments. I think that there isn't much to say. I have running code that
integrates ACME with a BRSKI Registrar.
[ofriel] you *will be* given some slides :)
> draft-friel-acme-subdomains-02
> Michael Richardson can present; this is a topic for WG adoption
At first, I think that we thought that this work required no standard action,
because it was within the server's policy to do this or not.
However, the client may not know the server's policy, and so section 5 adds the
basedomain and implicitSubdomainAuthorization boolean. If it comes back false
(or missing), then the client knows it has to perform authorizations for every
request (which is what my code above does).
I think that the WG previously expressed interest in adopting it, pending some
changes, and those changes are made. It may not need actual WG time, except
that having it on a schedule sometimes gets a document read :-)
[ofriel] Similarly, you *will be* given some slides :)
_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
