mirror of
https://github.com/acme-dns/acme-dns-client.git
synced 2026-04-25 21:35:57 +03:00
[GH-ISSUE #6] Configuration/Setup is accepted/verified as valid but challenge fails #3
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @JJ-Author on GitHub (Feb 17, 2021).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/acme-dns/acme-dns-client/issues/6
Hi,
first of all, nice work. Unfortunately, I am failing to acquire the wildcard certificate.
I am using v0.2 client release and certbot 0.40.0 and https://hub.docker.com/layers/joohoi/acme-dns/latest/images/sha256-dd671a4fc86863f9dc9bace1dee7c986034aa3946e36f079fbd9ed58a4f3c639?context=explore (from january 2021).
As one can see the acme-dns-client reports everything is set up correctly. The hook updates the txt records in the acme-dns (I checked the log from acme dns server, and verified with dig -> see below).
I am a bit lost now and would appreciate any help. Is there A) an error in the setup verification of the client and the setup is actually incorrect, or B) did just call the client/cerbot in an incorrect way?
(As a sidenote: I also realized that the setup check does not take into account whether the update of txt records actually works - so if the credentials to the acme dns server work and the allowFrom config works)
cerbot call
acme client check
dns check
@joohoi commented on GitHub (Feb 18, 2021):
Hi,
It looks like the
acme-dnsis not configured correctly. It seems to be missing the mandatoryNSrecord. Theacme-dns-clientonly checks for the validity of the client configuration, and not one of the servers.See https://github.com/joohoi/acme-dns#dns-records for more information about this.
@JJ-Author commented on GitHub (Feb 18, 2021):
Ah I see. Thanks a lot. It might be still a bit confusing, and it could be potentially useful if the client would check also for this mandatory NS record in case the cname entry would not use the default acme-dns provider. But from my side this could be closed.
@joohoi commented on GitHub (Feb 19, 2021):
Yeah I agree. There are however bunch of corner cases in that as well, that might cause confusion. I'll keep this in back of my head going forward. Have a great weekend!