From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D211B1FF13B for ; Wed, 22 Apr 2026 11:19:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9C96111845; Wed, 22 Apr 2026 11:19:05 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2026 11:18:32 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox-backup] acme: partially fix #6372: scale certificate renewal checks by lifetime To: Shannon Sterz , Christian Ebner , pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260421144645.275884-1-m.federanko@proxmox.com> <10adc6ba-eaaf-41ae-8585-20c40f590916@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Manuel Federanko In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1776849425568 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.825 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com] Message-ID-Hash: ROTRTVCIVQIXU2GSDG6P5TZCM22GHZCC X-Message-ID-Hash: ROTRTVCIVQIXU2GSDG6P5TZCM22GHZCC X-MailFrom: m.federanko@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 2026-04-22 11:08 AM, Shannon Sterz wrote: > On Wed Apr 22, 2026 at 8:49 AM CEST, Christian Ebner wrote: >> On 4/21/26 4:45 PM, Manuel Federanko wrote: >>> Start renewing a certificate once 2/3 of its total lifetime have passed, >>> instead of the hardcoded 30 days. This stays consistent with many >>> certificates, which are valid for 90 days. >>> >>> The update service runs daily, impose a 3 day minimum remaining lifetime >>> to still be able to handle transient failures for certificate renewals. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Manuel Federanko >>> Fixes: https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=6372 >>> --- >> >> @Shannon, can you have a look at this to avoid potential conflicts with >> your TLS certificate rotation series [0]? >> >> [0] >> https://lore.proxmox.com/pbs-devel/20260407135714.490747-1-s.sterz@proxmox.com/T/#t > > thanks for the heads-up, but from what i can tell not really. this > series addresses acme certificates, whereas mine is only relevant for > the self-signed certificates that pbs & pdm fall back on by default. imo > it would make sense to have these changes expand to include pdm too, > tho. Thanks for the input. I will also include this in PDM. I'm currently working on ARI, so this might change anyways, though I think it is still valuable until ARI is implemented, also, not all CAs support ARI.