<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:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-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;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.gmail-m3728026185806746419m-4056279355100754120gmail-il
{mso-style-name:gmail-m_3728026185806746419m_-4056279355100754120gmail-il;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@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>Good point.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>We would support this clarification.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-Tim<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt'><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> Public [mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Ryan Sleevi via Public<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, May 21, 2018 9:47 PM<br><b>To:</b> Wayne Thayer <wthayer@mozilla.com>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public@cabforum.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cabfpub] Voting Begins: Ballot 224: WHOIS and RDAP<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Google votes YES.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Noting, however, that despite the stated purpose of the ballot, there is the risk that by being a selection of options, we will have the unfortunately common risk of misreading it **incorrectly** as:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>"Retrieved (1) directly from the Domain Name Registrar or registry operator via the protocol defined in RFC 3912, (2) the Registry Data Access Protocol defined in RFC 7482, (3) or an HTTPS website"<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>rather than the correct reading, which is:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>"Retrieved directly from the Domain Name Registrar or registry operator via (1) the protocol defined in RFC 3912, (2) the Registry Data Access Protocol defined in RFC 7482, (3) or an HTTPS website"<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>This would ideally be resolved in a subsequent ballot as quickly as possible, for the benefit of our non-native English speaking participants in particular, and to ensure that it is clear and unambiguous the expectation, despite being plainly stated in the Purpose as to what the desired interpretation is. Ideally, such a ballot would not express normative requirements in definitions, and might otherwise use an explicit section to explain what process a CA should use for the determination of this information, but for expediency sake, clarifying in situ seems desirable.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 3:21 PM, Wayne Thayer via Public <<a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org" target="_blank">public@cabforum.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><p class=MsoNormal>Ballot 224: WHOIS and <span class=gmail-m3728026185806746419m-4056279355100754120gmail-il>RDAP</span><br> <br>Purpose of Ballot: The Registry Data Access Protocol (<span class=gmail-m3728026185806746419m-4056279355100754120gmail-il>RDAP</span>) is the successor to WHOIS, and this ballot adds explicit support for <span class=gmail-m3728026185806746419m-4056279355100754120gmail-il>RDAP</span> to the BRs by adding a definition of "WHOIS". The new definition permits the use of the registry or registrar's web interface, and requires WHOIS information to be retrieved directly from the registrar or registry of the domain name.<br> <br>The following motion has been proposed by Wayne Thayer of Mozilla and endorsed by Tim Hollebeek of DigiCert and Adriano Santoni of Actalis.<br> <br>— MOTION BEGINS –<br>This ballot modifies the “Baseline Requirements for the Issuance and Management of Publicly-Trusted Certificates” as follows, based upon Version 1.5.7:<br><br>In section 1.6.1, add the following definition:<br><br>WHOIS: information retrieved directly from the Domain Name Registrar or registry operator via the protocol defined in RFC 3912, the Registry Data Access Protocol defined in RFC 7482, or an HTTPS website. <br><br>In section 1.6.3, add the following references:<br><br>RFC3912, Request for Comments: 3912, WHOIS Protocol Specification, Daigle, September 2004. <br><br>RFC7482, Request for Comments: 7482, Registration Data Access Protocol (<span class=gmail-m3728026185806746419m-4056279355100754120gmail-il>RDAP</span>) Query Format, Newton, et al, March 2015. <br><br>— MOTION ENDS –<br> <br>A comparison of the changes can be found at <a href="https://github.com/cabforum/documents/compare/Ballot220...wthayer:Ballot224" target="_blank">https://github.com/cabforum/documents/compare/Ballot220...wthayer:Ballot224</a><br><br>The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows:<br> <br>Discussion (7+ days)<br> <br>Start Time: 2018-05-03 19:00 UTC<br> <br>End Time: after 2018-05-15 19:00 UTC<br> <br>Vote for approval (7 days)<br> <br>Start Time: 2018-05-15 19:00 UTC<br> <br>End Time: 2018-05-22 19:00 UTC<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>_______________________________________________<br>Public mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Public@cabforum.org">Public@cabforum.org</a><br><a href="https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public" target="_blank">https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public</a><o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div></body></html>