<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
On 08/01/2013 11:33 PM, From Rich Smith:
<blockquote
cite="mid:03c901ce8ef6$7141cdc0$53c56940$@smith@comodo.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Probably could use some word-smithing, but I think that strikes a good
balance between allowing CAs to continue to meet their commercial
requirements while still being able to move things forward regarding any
technical and verification requirements imposed by the BRs currently and in
future versions. Thoughts?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
What about the CAs that did an effort to implement and comply to the
BR just to realize that others simply don't care and conveniently
try to change the BR? What about those that refused a certificate
request or turned it down already at an inquiry by the potential
customer just to see the same guy getting it from somewhere else? <br>
<br>
The BR itself isn't really such a grandiose thing that we could be
really proud of it, but if watering it down further is the way than
I'd propose to get rid of it entirely. <br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2">Regards </td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2"> </td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Signer: </td>
<td>Eddy Nigg, COO/CTO</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td> </td>
<td><a href="http://www.startcom.org">StartCom Ltd.</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>XMPP: </td>
<td><a href="xmpp:startcom@startcom.org">startcom@startcom.org</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Blog: </td>
<td><a href="http://blog.startcom.org">Join the Revolution!</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Twitter: </td>
<td><a href="http://twitter.com/eddy_nigg">Follow Me</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>