<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Apr 11, 2017, at 1:46 PM, Jeremy Rowley via Public <<a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org" class="">public@cabforum.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 8pt; line-height: 15.399999618530273px; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><span class=""><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">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></p><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></blockquote>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”).</div><div><br class=""></div><div>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?</div></body></html>