Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-acme-ari-08: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-ari/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for addressing my previous blocking DISCUSS points, see https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/39amfomGbjKAMTDeAP_Q7mEpg54/ The points below were and are still non-blocking but I sincerely think that the document readability will be improved if addressed. The text sent by Aaron about these 2 points would be beneficial to the readers/implementers if included in a -09. The choice is really up to the author at this point. ## COMMENTS (non-blocking) ### Section 4.1 Also in this section, should the note about prefixing a "00" when the serial number is a negative number be more than a simple note but normative ? Or if this is per default in ACME, adding a reference ? ### Section 4.2 Is the first `Conforming clients SHOULD provide this URL to their operator` correct ? I would assume that this JSON reply is sent by the ACME server and not by the client. _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list -- acme@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to acme-le...@ietf.org
