<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">No, Geoff – Section 2 is not designed to say that a CA
</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">can still use validation data from before but only to the extent that it complies with the new requirements. It says that the CA can reuse validation data properly collected during the
validation process before the effective date of Ballot 190 for the normal period for reuse of validation data. The CA does not have to revet Subscribers again until the prior data expires according to the normal rules for re-use of data.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">As Gerv said on the call today, it will be a disincentive for CAs ever to vote for incremental change in validation methods if the changes always take effect immediately, and
wipe out the CA’s ability to re-use data that was properly collected according to the prior rules and is still in the permitted re-use period. I don’t think anyone intended that result when we came up with Ballot 169 and now Ballot 190.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Public [mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Geoff Keating via Public<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, April 13, 2017 4:50 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public@cabforum.org><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Geoff Keating <geoffk@apple.com><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [EXTERNAL]Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 190: Domain Validation<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Apr 11, 2017, at 1:46 PM, Jeremy Rowley via Public <<a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org">public@cabforum.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8.0pt;line-height:11.55pt;font-variant-caps: normal;text-align:start;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;word-spacing:0px">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt">This provisions of Ballot Section 1 will apply only to the validation of domain names occurring after this Ballot 190’s effective date. Validation of domain names that occurs before this Ballot’s effective date and the resulting
validation data may continue to be used for the periods specified in BR 4.2.1 and EVGL 11.14.3 so long as the validations were conducted in compliance with the BR Section 3.2.2.4 validation methods in effect at the time of each validation.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal">I have to say, I find this confusing too. ‘validation data’ to me sounds like not the same thing as ‘validation’—I would think ‘validation data’ is the raw results of the validation (“The user clicked on a link with a code of XXXX which
was the same code we sent the user”) and not the conclusion (“so the user controls the domain”).<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">In any case what I think we would like is that, as of the effective date, you can still use validation data from before but only to the extent that it complies with the new requirements?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>