I think the WG should start to think about its future.  Below are some updates 
and questions.  Let’s discuss onlist and at the meeting in March.

If you look at our status page, 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/acme/documents/, most of the adopted documents 
are well along.  To summarize:

    draft-ietf-acme-uthority-token waiting for IESG review
    draft-ietf-acme-Authority-token-tnauthlist update just submitted, waiting 
for AD review
    draft-ietf-acme-dtnnodeid Dependent drafts now in RFC pipeline, update 
coming
    draft-ietf-acme-email-smime in RFC pipeline
    draft-ietf-acme-star-delegation new draft coming to address AD feedback
    draft-ietf-acme-integrations some discussion, 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/acme/?q=integrations
    draft-ietf-acme-client No update or discussions recently.

What should we do about the last two documents?

We have a couple of documents that the WG has not adopted. There hasn’t been 
much discussion of any of them since the last IETF virtual meeting.

    draft-biggs-acme-sso
    draft-friel-acme-subdomians
    draft-tweedale-acme-discovery
    draft-tweedale-acme-server-capabilities
(The last two are inter-related).

What should we do about these?

Do we want to say “we’re done, we’re successful, please move all new challenges 
to an appropriate group?”

_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme

Reply via email to