<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi team,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I’m working on (hopefully) buttoning up Ballot SC51 and wanted to finalize/confirm a second endorser for this ballot.</div><div class="">The full description is available here: <a href="https://wiki.cabforum.org/scwg/sc51-reduce-clarify-audit-log-and-records-archival-retention" class="">https://wiki.cabforum.org/scwg/sc51-reduce-clarify-audit-log-and-records-archival-retention</a> and the redline is here: <a href="https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/compare/cda0f92ee70121fd5d692685b97ebb6669c74fb7...63dc6210e728349bb4602e4ede051efed593a91c" class="">https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/compare/cda0f92ee70121fd5d692685b97ebb6669c74fb7...63dc6210e728349bb4602e4ede051efed593a91c</a>.</div><div class="">As a brief reminder, this is a spiritual successor of SC38, which encountered some challenges in discussion due to unforeseen interactions with e.g. 4.1.1. With SC50 passed, and other changes made in the draft text of SC51, we believe we’ve addressed and built further upon the original goals of SC38, allowing us to reduce the retention period of archives, while also further clarifying surrounding requirements for CAs.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Is anyone here willing/able to endorse these changes?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Thank you!</div><div class="">-Clint</div></body></html>