Re: UTA: Server certificate management (Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-uta-email-tls-certs-05.txt>)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Harald,

On 03/12/2015 20:59, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
Den 03. des. 2015 15:33, skrev Viktor Dukhovni:
On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 12:53:25PM +0100, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
 [...]

What I want the document to call out is that there are known, important use
cases for which RFC 6186 together with this draft *DOES NOT WORK*.

Quoting RFC 2026 is always fun:

    A Proposed Standard should have no known technical omissions with
    respect to the requirements placed upon it.  However, the IESG may
    waive this requirement in order to allow a specification to advance
    to the Proposed Standard state when it is considered to be useful and
    necessary (and timely) even with known technical omissions.

The "technical omission" here is "using 6186 together with mail servers
supporting a high number of domains is going to be painful, and this
document doesn't say how to solve it".

Fix that, or document it.
I think this is fair. I would prefer to document existing limitations/problems.

I will work on some text on this.

Best Regards,
Alexey




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]