<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<div class="moz-text-html" lang="x-western">
<div class="WordSection1">These are the Final Minutes of the
Teleconference described in the subject of this message<b>.</b>
<h2 class="MsoNormal">Attendees (in alphabetical order)</h2>
Adam Clark (Visa), Arno Fiedler (D-TRUST), Ben Wilson (Mozilla),
Bruce Morton (Entrust Datacard), Clint Wilson (Apple), Corey
Bonnell (SecureTrust), Chris Kemmerer (SSL.com), Daniela Hood
(GoDaddy), Dean Coclin (Digicert), Dimitris Zacharopoulos
(HARICA), Doug Beattie (GlobalSign), Dustin Hollenback
(Microsoft), Enrico Entschew (D-TRUST), Inaba Atsushi
(GlobalSign), Janet Hines (SecureTrust), Jos Purvis (Cisco
Systems), Li-Chun Chen (Chunghwa Telecom), Mads Henriksveen
(Buypass AS), Michael Guenther (SwissSign), Mike Reilly
(Microsoft), Neil Dunbar (TrustCor Systems), Niko Carpenter
(SecureTrust), Patrick Nohe (GlobalSign), Pedro Fuentes (OISTE
Foundation), Peter Miskovic (Disig), Rich Smith (Sectigo), Robin
Alden (Sectigo), Ryan Sleevi (Google), Shelley Brewer
(Digicert), Stephen Davidson (Quo Vadis), Taconis Lewis (US
Federal PKI Management Authority), Thanos Vrachnos (SSL.com),
Tim Hollebeek (Digicert), Tobias Josefowitz (Opera Software AS),
Trevoli Ponds-White (Amazon), Wayne Thayer (Mozilla), Wendy
Brown (US Federal PKI Management Authority).
<h2 class="MsoNormal">Minutes <br>
</h2>
<h3> 1. Roll Call<br>
</h3>
<h3> </h3>
The Chair took attendance.
<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">Accepted without changes. Enrico
volunteered to take minutes on the next call.<br>
</p>
<h3 class="MsoNormal">4. Approval of minutes from previous
teleconference</h3>
<h3 class="MsoNormal"> </h3>
Accepted without objections.
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<h3 class="MsoNormal">5. Forum Infrastructure Subcommittee
update</h3>
Jos gave the reports.<br>
<br>
<ul>
<li>On the issue of migrating the mailers and web site, the
subcommittee will make progress with the web site first.</li>
<li>On the issue of pandoc formatted BRs, Jos will proceed
with making changes to the "Travis" configuration to
autobuild with the new pandoc.</li>
<li>WebEx demoing various options. Evaluated default and
existing meeting options with Dimitris and tested various
scenarios. We did not have a chance to evaluate other types
of webex meetings because they were not available in our
subscription.</li>
<li>Migration of webex. The URL is changing and
cabf.cabforum.org is the new URL. Chairs and Vice Chairs of
subcommittees should ask for an account and schedule new
meetings. Don't forget to update the associated wiki page
with the new meeting information.<br>
</li>
</ul>
<br>
Tim asked about the calendar invites on the old system. Jos
replied that the old WebEx account will disappear in June.<br>
<p>The draft minutes of that particular Subcommittee meeting are
available at the following URL:<br>
</p>
<ul>
<li><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/infrastructure/2020-May/000229.html"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/infrastructure/2020-May/000229.html</a>
<br>
</li>
</ul>
<p> </p>
<ul>
</ul>
<h3 class="MsoNormal">6. Code Signing Working Group update</h3>
<p>Dean: The merged document is ready to proceed. They also
created a prioritized list of parking lot items, and will work
with the top 5 things. The SC added a code signing wiki page
with this information. Draft document with mark-ups and
parking lot items are added to that wiki.<br>
<br>
Next plan is to put this document up for a ballot. Dimitris
asked if this would be considered a new Guideline, thus
requiring 60 days of IPR review or an update to an existing
guideline, thus requiring 30 days of IPR review. Dean said
they will add it to the agenda for next meeting. Tim proposed
to update of one of the two. Dean will explore these options.
Sunsetting one document makes sense and Ryan thinks 30 days
is ok with calling this "merge" a maintenance guideline.<br>
</p>
<h3 class="MsoNormal">7. New S/MIME WG Charter</h3>
This was now supposed to be in the discussion period but due to
a technical issue with the ballot redline link, it is not a
correct ballot. Tim will have to restart the discussion period
by posting the proper "immutable" redline link, if this is
supposed to be the normative ballot text. <br>
Tim mentioned that there is one last thing being discussed about
root certificates that are not publicly trusted and which should
be out of scope. There are concerns raised by Ryan that he is
trying to understand.<br>
<br>
Ryan said that the way this is written, what seems to be
documented as out of scope can easily be presented differently
to be in scope. He asked what is it that we're trying to
prevent. This language also prevents things we want to address.
FPKI schemes and policy seems that they cannot be discussed.
There was also a change in the introduction of the ballot.<br>
<br>
Tim thinks that the current language does not prohibit that. The
WG should not delete these things. Discuss for publicly-trusted.<br>
<br>
Corey, asked to clarify the net result. This group would not
produce standards that would be used exclusively on a private
PKI.<br>
<br>
Dimitris reminded the members about the codesigning WG charter
where the Trusted third-party model was in scope and the non
third-party model was out of scope. <br>
<br>
Arno said that it's good to take existing standards into account
like ETSI NCP, etc. <br>
<br>
Tim will check Forum-11 for an immutable red-line link.<br>
<h3 class="MsoNormal">8. Discussion about F2F agenda<br>
</h3>
<p>No new topics for the agenda. It will be finalized at the
next meeting.<br>
<br>
If anybody has an idea of a good topic to discuss on our
virtual meeting send it to the public list or to Dimitris.</p>
<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>
<br>
Doug mentioned that he assumes same virtual mode will be for a
couple more F2F meetings. It is becoming very likely that F2F 51
will also need to be done virtually. The group agreed to wait
another month to 6 weeks. Likely it will be cancelled due to
International restrictions.<br>
<br>
Trev: Some companies do not allow employees to travel<br>
Doug: There is also an significant financial impact <br>
Corey: Currently, US and Japan self-quaranteen for 2 weeks.<br>
<br>
In relation to Forum-12: Update CA/B Forum Bylaws.<br>
There has been no feedback and Dimitris intends to start the
voting period as soon as the discussion period is over.<br>
<ul>
</ul>
<h3 class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:1.0pt;margin-left:0in">10.
Next call<br>
</h3>
May 28, 2020 at 11:30 am Eastern Time.
<h3 class="MsoNormal">Adjourned</h3>
<h3><b>F2F Meeting Schedule: </b></h3>
<ul>
<li>2020: June 9-11 (Virtual Meeting), October 20-22 Tokyo
(GlobalSign)</li>
<li>2021: Feb-March San Jose, CA (Cisco), June – Poland
(Asseco-Certum), October - Minneapolis (OATI) <br>
</li>
<li>2022: Mar-April Dubai (DarkMatter) or New Delhi /
Bengaluru (e-Mudhra), June - <font color="#ff0000">[Open]</font>,
October - New Delhi / Bengaluru (e-Mudhra) or Dubai
(DarkMatter) </li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>