Need to support non-ASN.1 DPV clients?

[Steve Hanna <steve.hanna@xxxxxxx>]

Stephen Kent wrote:
>      It sounds like we need to decide whether non-PKI aware,
>      non-ASN.1-capable clients need to be supported. If so, we should
>      probably define a set of requirements for such clients and include this
>      item in that list. I would suggest that such clients are an important
>      group and should be supported.
> 
> I put this question to the list in my strawman spec over 2 weeks ago,
> and have not yet gotten a concrete proposal on how to accommodate such
> clients. I will soon decide that we will NOT support them for now,
> unless I see such a proposal.

Yes, that question is highlighted in your requirements document. As you
point out there, it is important to resolve this question promptly in
order to decide on DPV and DPD requirements. But, as you pointed out in
yesterday's email, the question has not been discussed on this mailing
list in a substantial manner since your requirements document was
published. Therefore, I'd like to start a thread specifically addressed
to this question:

  Do we need to support non-PKI aware, non-ASN.1-capable DPV clients?

Let's settle this now. If you believe that such support is necessary and
should be included in this effort or if you believe that it should not,
please speak up now and explain why or why not.

As for a "concrete proposal", I doubt that it will be hard to come up
with a proposal if we decide that support for non-ASN.1-capable DPV
clients is needed.

-Steve

P.S. I will set aside the more specific points we were discussing
regarding non-ASN.1-capable clients until this more basic question is
resolved.