<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <br>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/3/2021 6:47 μ.μ., Ryan Sleevi
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CACvaWvbFMm8hw6HhY57+7bLKU_baTp4qv4u3VH77=vZc8uTGXQ@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <div dir="ltr">Dimitris,
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>Given the length of discussion here, are you aware of
          systems not yet conforming? Perhaps you can speak about what
          concrete (rather than abstract) difficulties there would be?</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>That's not to say an effective date is a forgone
          conclusion, but I think as a Forum, we're much more productive
          when members with concrete concerns bring them forward, rather
          than abstracts "on behalf of someone else". For example, what
          challenges might HARICA face? Understanding that would help
          both make better ballots, and perhaps highlight industry good
          practices from other CAs that HARICA could adopt so that these
          aren't concerns in the future.</div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    CAs need to update their validation code to allow ONLY these
    specific HTTP responses for redirects. This also needs to be applied
    consistently, including ACME implementations that may not currently
    support this configuration option. For example, I believe EJBCA does
    not have this option for their ACME server engine component.<br>
    <br>
    For HARICA, it's easy to update the main RA code but we currently
    rely on EJBCA for ACME and that might cause some delays.<br>
    <br>
    I hope this helps.<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    Dimitris.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CACvaWvbFMm8hw6HhY57+7bLKU_baTp4qv4u3VH77=vZc8uTGXQ@mail.gmail.com"><br>
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 12:59
          AM Dimitris Zacharopoulos via Servercert-wg <<a
            href="mailto:servercert-wg@cabforum.org"
            moz-do-not-send="true">servercert-wg@cabforum.org</a>>
          wrote:<br>
        </div>
        <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
          0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
          <div> <span style="font-family:sans-serif">Shouldn't there be
              an effective date in this ballot so that CAs have time to
              update their various systems to support these updated
              requirements?</span> <br>
            <br>
            <span style="font-family:sans-serif">Software vendors might
              also need time to update and test their software before
              releasing a newer version, which then needs to be properly
              tested and installed by CAs.</span> <br>
            <br>
            <span style="font-family:sans-serif">Thanks,</span> <br>
            <br>
            <br>
            <span style="font-family:sans-serif">Dimitris.</span> <br>
          </div>
          _______________________________________________<br>
          Servercert-wg mailing list<br>
          <a href="mailto:Servercert-wg@cabforum.org" target="_blank"
            moz-do-not-send="true">Servercert-wg@cabforum.org</a><br>
          <a
            href="https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/servercert-wg"
            rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/servercert-wg</a><br>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>