<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:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@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;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Segoe UI Symbol";
panose-1:2 11 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 3;}
/* 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.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.apple-tab-span
{mso-style-name:apple-tab-span;}
span.EmailStyle19
{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">One thing I have recommended is that we time the terms of officers to end just *<b>after</b>* our F2F meetings each year, so the officers who plan a meeting actually get to
run the meetings. By happenstance, the CABF Chair and Vice Chair terms end on Oct. 21 (that’s just the date in 2012 when we completed the first officer election using our current Bylaws method). The problem is, this year CFCA proposed two alternate dates
the for Shanghai meeting: one Oct. 16-18, and one Oct. 23-25. If we had chosen the latter date, my term would have ended the Sunday before the meeting started – I would have worked up the Agenda, etc. but could not run the meeting. Not the end of the world,
but not desirable.<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">That’s why I think we should consider a ballot this fall to make the Forum officer dates run Nov. 1-Oct. 31 in even-numbered years. We can have an initial term of Oct. 22,
2018 – Oct. 31, 2020 for the new Chair and Vice Chair to fill the gap.<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">On the SCWG officers, no matter what term option we choose on the Doodle poll, it will take about 2+ months to complete the two elections for SCWG Chair and Vice Chair under
Bylaw 4.1, so the new officer terms will start in mid-October at the earliest no matter what option we pick. Given that, my preference is that all officer terms run the same two year period, instead of random times before and after each other – and again,
I think that terms should end after a typical F2F meeting time (meaning, October 31 for any term that ends in the Fall). But let’s see what the poll results are.
<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">If you haven’t expressed a preference on behalf of your company, please do so at the NEW poll link I sent out earlier today on the Management list. We can discuss the results
on our next SCWG call.<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>Virginia Fournier via Public<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 17, 2018 11:50 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> public@cabforum.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [EXTERNAL][cabfpub] Elections<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I agree with Tim - the Forum voting rules should not change. There’s no reason that WG chair elections need to take place at the same time as Forum elections. This doesn’t happen in other standards organizations - elections happen on
their own timetable. It might be less confusing if they happen in a staggered manner rather than all at once anyway. <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Best regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Virginia Fournier<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Senior Standards Counsel<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#717171"></span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"> Apple Inc.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI Symbol",sans-serif;color:black">☏</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"> </span></span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">669-227-9595<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI Symbol",sans-serif;color:black">✉</span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;color:black">︎</span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"> <a href="mailto:vmf@apple.com">vmf@apple.com</a></span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#0433FF"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#579DFF"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Jul 17, 2018, at 10:40 AM, <a href="mailto:public-request@cabforum.org">
public-request@cabforum.org</a> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Send Public mailing list submissions to<br>
<span class="apple-tab-span"> </span><a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org">public@cabforum.org</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<span class="apple-tab-span"> </span><a href="https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public">https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<span class="apple-tab-span"> </span><a href="mailto:public-request@cabforum.org">public-request@cabforum.org</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<span class="apple-tab-span"> </span><a href="mailto:public-owner@cabforum.org">public-owner@cabforum.org</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of Public digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Elections (Tim Hollebeek)<br>
2. Re: Elections (Kirk Hall)<br>
3. Re: Elections (Tim Hollebeek)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 16:01:18 +0000<br>
From: Tim Hollebeek <<a href="mailto:tim.hollebeek@digicert.com">tim.hollebeek@digicert.com</a>><br>
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <<a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org">public@cabforum.org</a>><br>
Subject: [cabfpub] Elections<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<span class="apple-tab-span"> </span><<a href="mailto:BN6PR14MB1106E73E1BA99ABFB00832B1835C0@BN6PR14MB1106.namprd14.prod.outlook.com">BN6PR14MB1106E73E1BA99ABFB00832B1835C0@BN6PR14MB1106.namprd14.prod.outlook.com</a>><br>
<span class="apple-tab-span"> </span><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
As a reminder, we ended up with the current SCWG chairs and election rules<br>
because we were unable to reach agreement on the election rules. So we<br>
punted it to the SCWG to handle once it was formed, to avoid blocking<br>
progress on getting governance reform passed. I don't see a good reason to<br>
delay resolving those issues and having elections now that the SCWG exists.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I am extremely concerned that one of the proposals involves changes to the<br>
election procedures at the Forum level. I see no compelling reason why that<br>
is necessary, and why the current terms and rules should not be left alone.<br>
Attempting to modify the Forum elections as well will add complexity and<br>
controversy with no added benefit. We should focus on what the SCWG rules<br>
should be, and agree sustainable long-term rules and a good precedents for<br>
new working groups instead of basing proposals on short term considerations.<br>
For example, it probably will not be possible for the WG elections to be in<br>
sync with the main forum, if only because the S/MIME working group, which is<br>
likely to exist very soon, won't exist soon enough to have elections in sync<br>
with the main Forum.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-Tim<br>
<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180717/416eb366/attachment-0001.html">http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180717/416eb366/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...<br>
Name: smime.p7s<br>
Type: application/pkcs7-signature<br>
Size: 4940 bytes<br>
Desc: not available<br>
URL: <<a href="http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180717/416eb366/attachment-0001.p7s">http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180717/416eb366/attachment-0001.p7s</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 17:11:13 +0000<br>
From: Kirk Hall <<a href="mailto:Kirk.Hall@entrustdatacard.com">Kirk.Hall@entrustdatacard.com</a>><br>
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <<a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org">public@cabforum.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Elections<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<span class="apple-tab-span"> </span><<a href="mailto:72c46d41bc784f7f9493a2d74984fda3@PMSPEX04.corporate.datacard.com">72c46d41bc784f7f9493a2d74984fda3@PMSPEX04.corporate.datacard.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
<br>
Tim - if future WGs are started mid-year, it would be easy to sync up the initial officer terms to the "standard" officer terms of the Forum and existing WGs - you just have either begin with a "short term" initial term (for example, "The initial term of the
S/MIME WG Chair shall run from May 15, 2019 to Oct. 31, 2019. Thereafter, terms of officers of the S/MIME WG shall run from November 1 of the election year through October 31 two years later." Or the initial term can be a "long term" - "The initial term
of the S/MIME WG Chair shall run from September 10, 2019 to Oct. 31, 2021. Thereafter, terms of officers of the S/MIME WG shall run from November 1 of the election year through October 31 two years later." Each new WG would have control of the initial term
for officers, and can make it sync up to a standard two year term for all officers.<br>
<br>
From: Public [<a href="mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org">mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org</a>] On Behalf Of Tim Hollebeek via Public<br>
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 9:01 AM<br>
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <<a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org">public@cabforum.org</a>><br>
Subject: [EXTERNAL][cabfpub] Elections<br>
<br>
<br>
As a reminder, we ended up with the current SCWG chairs and election rules because we were unable to reach agreement on the election rules. So we punted it to the SCWG to handle once it was formed, to avoid blocking progress on getting governance reform passed.
I don't see a good reason to delay resolving those issues and having elections now that the SCWG exists.<br>
<br>
I am extremely concerned that one of the proposals involves changes to the election procedures at the Forum level. I see no compelling reason why that is necessary, and why the current terms and rules should not be left alone. Attempting to modify the Forum
elections as well will add complexity and controversy with no added benefit. We should focus on what the SCWG rules should be, and agree sustainable long-term rules and a good precedents for new working groups instead of basing proposals on short term considerations.
For example, it probably will not be possible for the WG elections to be in sync with the main forum, if only because the S/MIME working group, which is likely to exist very soon, won't exist soon enough to have elections in sync with the main Forum.<br>
<br>
-Tim<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180717/7cb19b01/attachment-0001.html">http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180717/7cb19b01/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 17:40:25 +0000<br>
From: Tim Hollebeek <<a href="mailto:tim.hollebeek@digicert.com">tim.hollebeek@digicert.com</a>><br>
To: Kirk Hall <<a href="mailto:Kirk.Hall@entrustdatacard.com">Kirk.Hall@entrustdatacard.com</a>>, CA/Browser Forum Public<br>
<span class="apple-tab-span"> </span>Discussion List <<a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org">public@cabforum.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Elections<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<span class="apple-tab-span"> </span><<a href="mailto:BN6PR14MB1106D29FB520015B6F094FB3835C0@BN6PR14MB1106.namprd14.prod.outlook.com">BN6PR14MB1106D29FB520015B6F094FB3835C0@BN6PR14MB1106.namprd14.prod.outlook.com</a>><br>
<span class="apple-tab-span"> </span><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
<br>
Or we could just avoid the problem by not creating it in the first place.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Speaking as someone who attended most of the governance reform calls, if we<br>
learned one thing from governance reform, it's that simpler is better, and<br>
gets us to consensus faster.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-Tim<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
From: Public [<a href="mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org">mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org</a>] On Behalf Of Kirk Hall via<br>
Public<br>
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 1:11 PM<br>
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <<a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org">public@cabforum.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Elections<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Tim - if future WGs are started mid-year, it would be easy to sync up the<br>
initial officer terms to the "standard" officer terms of the Forum and<br>
existing WGs - you just have either begin with a "short term" initial term<br>
(for example, "The initial term of the S/MIME WG Chair shall run from May<br>
15, 2019 to Oct. 31, 2019. Thereafter, terms of officers of the S/MIME WG<br>
shall run from November 1 of the election year through October 31 two years<br>
later." Or the initial term can be a "long term" - "The initial term of the<br>
S/MIME WG Chair shall run from September 10, 2019 to Oct. 31, 2021.<br>
Thereafter, terms of officers of the S/MIME WG shall run from November 1 of<br>
the election year through October 31 two years later." Each new WG would<br>
have control of the initial term for officers, and can make it sync up to a<br>
standard two year term for all officers.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
From: Public [<a href="mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org">mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org</a>] On Behalf Of Tim Hollebeek<br>
via Public<br>
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 9:01 AM<br>
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <<a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org%0b%3cmailto:public@cabforum.org">public@cabforum.org<br>
<mailto:public@cabforum.org</a>> ><br>
Subject: [EXTERNAL][cabfpub] Elections<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
As a reminder, we ended up with the current SCWG chairs and election rules<br>
because we were unable to reach agreement on the election rules. So we<br>
punted it to the SCWG to handle once it was formed, to avoid blocking<br>
progress on getting governance reform passed. I don't see a good reason to<br>
delay resolving those issues and having elections now that the SCWG exists.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I am extremely concerned that one of the proposals involves changes to the<br>
election procedures at the Forum level. I see no compelling reason why that<br>
is necessary, and why the current terms and rules should not be left alone.<br>
Attempting to modify the Forum elections as well will add complexity and<br>
controversy with no added benefit. We should focus on what the SCWG rules<br>
should be, and agree sustainable long-term rules and a good precedents for<br>
new working groups instead of basing proposals on short term considerations.<br>
For example, it probably will not be possible for the WG elections to be in<br>
sync with the main forum, if only because the S/MIME working group, which is<br>
likely to exist very soon, won't exist soon enough to have elections in sync<br>
with the main Forum.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-Tim<br>
<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180717/454d334e/attachment.html">http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180717/454d334e/attachment.html</a>><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...<br>
Name: smime.p7s<br>
Type: application/pkcs7-signature<br>
Size: 4940 bytes<br>
Desc: not available<br>
URL: <<a href="http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180717/454d334e/attachment.p7s">http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180717/454d334e/attachment.p7s</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<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">https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public</a><br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of Public Digest, Vol 75, Issue 59<br>
**************************************<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>