<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-text-html" lang="x-western">
<div class="WordSection1"><br>
These are the Final Minutes of the Teleconference described in
the subject of this message
<h2 class="MsoNormal">Attendees (in alphabetical order)</h2>
Anna Weinberg (Apple), Ben Wilson (Digicert), Bruce Morton
(Entrust Datacard), Chris Kemmerer (SSL.com), Daymion Reynolds
(GoDaddy), Dean Coclin (Digicert), Dimitris Zacharopoulos
(HARICA), Doug Beattie (GlobalSign), Dustin Hollenback
(Microsoft), Frank Corday (SecureTrust), Geoff Keating (Apple),
Inaba Atsushi (GlobalSign), Iñigo Barreira (360 Browser), Joanna
Fox (GoDaddy), Kirk Hall (Entrust Datacard), Li-Chun Chen
(Chunghwa Telecom), Mads Henriksveen (Buypass AS), Mahmud Khair
(SecureTrust), Marcelo Silva (Visa), Michelle Coon (OATI), Mike
Reilly (Microsoft), Neil Dunbar (TrustCor Systems), Niko
Carpenter (SecureTrust), Rich Smith (Sectigo), Robin Alden
(Sectigo), Ryan Sleevi (Google), Shelley Brewer (Digicert), Tim
Shirley (SecureTrust), Trevoli Ponds-White (Amazon), Wayne
Thayer (Mozilla).
<h2 class="MsoNormal">Minutes <br>
</h2>
<h3> 1. Roll Call<br>
</h3>
The Chair took attendance<br>
<h3 class="MsoNormal">2. Read Antitrust Statement<br>
</h3>
<p class="MsoNormal">The Antitrust Statement was read </p>
<h3 class="MsoNormal">3. Review Agenda<br>
</h3>
<p class="MsoNormal">Today's Agenda was approved.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<h3 class="MsoNormal">4. Approval of Minutes of previous
teleconference</h3>
The minutes of February 21, 2019 teleconference were approved
and will be posted to the Public list and the Public web site.<br>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<h3>5. Forum Infrastructure Working Group update</h3>
Wayne reported that the Infrastructure WG discussed two major
topics. The first topic was around using Github as the canonical
version of cabforum documents. We currently have the ability to
create a PDF document from a GitHub "file" (currently in
Markdown format) and the question is whether this PDF document
is acceptable, as in "does it have all the features that we
need" to make it usable as THE canonical document.<br>
<br>
The solution might come from a specific session at the F2F
meeting to discuss the differences between the existing PDF
documents and the automatically produced PDF documents from
GitHub. We will need to compare that with the current practice
where a word document is maintained on the wiki and is manually
updated. That's why there is now a specific slot at the F2F to
discuss this topic.<br>
<br>
Dimitris added that this is one step towards using GitHub as the
maintainer engine for canonical versions of Guidelines and
documents. We have also scheduled a second slot with a short
demo on how to create red-line documents using GitHub, something
useful for people that want to create ballots and need to
produce a red-lined document.<br>
<br>
The second topic discussed was about the current ballot rules
that require both a "Ballot Version" (statements like "in
section X, replace the language with the following text") and a
"red-line" which is just for assistance and is not normative for
the ballot. These inconsistencies that have been spotted from
time-to-time may create confusion to Members that review the
ballots.<br>
<br>
Wayne also mentioned that most members prefer to read
"red-lined" versions because it makes the review easier. The
question is whether there is a need to create the "Ballot
Version" when there is a clear proposed red-line Maintenance
Guideline version.<br>
<br>
We would like to propose an option that a ballot only has to
document the red-line and that red-line version should be
enforced. In order for this to be permitted, a small change in
the Bylaws is required. Since we are already in the middle of
changing the Bylaws, this additional change may be added in the
proposed Bylaws changes.<br>
<br>
Kirk mentioned that was a time where only red-lines were
required and the "Ballot Version" was not required. Wayne
responded that the current Bylaws include language that strongly
implies that the more descriptive language ("Ballot Version") is
required for every ballot. The plan is to update the language to
clearly state that a "Ballot Version" is optional.<br>
<br>
Ryan commented that the language around the "Ballot Version" was
discussed during Governance reform and the main reason was that
it would cover for cases where the red-lined version was against
an older version of the Guidelines.<br>
<br>
Kirk said that the same problem would probably exist in a
red-line and in a "Ballot Version" against an "incorrect" (or
obsolete) text but is happy with anything that makes things
clearer.<br>
<br>
Dimitris summarized that the goal is to "drive" things on
maintaining the "canonical" versions of documents on GitHub and
in order to get there, we need to get members acquainted with
GitHub and more familiar with it. Then, we would be in a
position to introduce more specific procedures on how to perform
ballot updates. We can then add specific steps utilizing GitHub
and make these normative procedures in the future.<br>
<br>
Of course, there will be specific instructions and demos to
support that.<br>
<br>
Ryan mentioned that he would circulate the minutes of the latest
Infrastructure Working Group soon.<br>
<h3 class="MsoNormal">6. Follow-up on new S/MIME WG Charter and
formation of Code Signing WG </h3>
Ballot Forum-8 for the creation of the Code Signing Working
Group is currently in the voting period and will likely pass.
Dimitris asked about provisions of the CSCWG at the upcoming F2F
and if Dean would need a slot for a kick-off meeting of the new
WG, but also time during the first day (Tuesday).<br>
<br>
There was agreement to use the currently empty slot at the end
of the meeting on Thursday and 30 minutes closer to the end of
Tuesday.<br>
<br>
The S/MIME WG charter will be based on the Code Signing WG
Charter but there is no progress in that area yet.<br>
<h3 class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:1.0pt;margin-left:0in">7.
Upcoming F2F 46 meeting March 12-14, 2019 (hosted by Apple)</h3>
<br>
All basic information related to the F2F meeting venue is
published on the wiki. Remote audio/video participation
information will also be posted on the wiki. Apple will prepare
an Apple WebEx session. Geoff also mentioned that there will be
some breakfast available at the venue, and this is stated in the
F2F Agenda.<br>
<h3 class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:1.0pt;margin-left:0in">8.
Finalize CA/B Forum Agenda for F2F 46</h3>
Dimitris read the topics of the current draft agenda and
received no objections about the topics or time allocations. The
final agenda will be posted on the public list.<br>
<h3 class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:1.0pt;margin-left:0in">9.
Any Other Business</h3>
Dimitris mentioned that all F2F slots have been filled until
October 2021. After Greece, the next F2F meeting will take place
Oct 28-31 in Guangzhou, hosted by GDCA. Feb-March 2020 the
meeting is scheduled for Bratislava, hosted by Disig and
Feb-March 2021 the meeting is scheduled for Dubai, hosted by
DarkMatter.<br>
<h3 class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:1.0pt;margin-left:0in">10.
Bylaws and existing Charters update </h3>
<br>
Wayne summarized the current state of updating the Bylaws,
reminding everyone that the last changes were sent already to
the public list. Members should use this period of time to
discuss these changes with their legal teams and attend the F2F
with specific questions or concerns that will have to be
addressed. If we receive no objections, then there will be a
ballot prepared soon after the F2F to update the Bylaws
according to the proposed changes.<br>
<br>
One change is proposed to be added in section 2.4, clarifying
that a single red-line should be sufficient for a draft
guideline ballot.<br>
<br>
Kirk mentioned that the group should put some thought about past
cases where some mail clients could not properly display the
red-line attachments and recommended that PDF is used for that.
Wayne responded that the proposal doesn't actually get into this
area and leaves the existing bylaws as-is and just clarifies
that a red-line alone is sufficient to submit a ballot.<br>
<h3 class="MsoNormal">11. Next call</h3>
<p class="MsoNormal">March 21, 2019 at 11:00 am Eastern Time.</p>
<h3 class="MsoNormal">Adjourned</h3>
<h3><b>F2F Meeting Schedule: </b></h3>
<ul>
<li>2019: March 12-14, 2019 – Cupertino, CA (Apple), June
11-13, 2019 – Greece (HARICA), October 28-31– Guangzhou
(GDCA)</li>
<li>2020: Feb-March<font color="#ff0000"> </font>Bratislava
(Disig), June – Minneapolis (OATI), October – Tokyo
(GlobalSign)</li>
<li>2021: Feb-March Dubai (DarkMatter), June – Poland
(Asseco-Certum), October <font color="#ff0000">[Open]</font></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>