[cabf_governance] Ballot FORUM-4 v3

[Tim Hollebeek]

We discussed it on the Validation WG call.  Trustwave was voluntold to write
a quick ballot to fix it.

 

-Tim

 

From: Govreform <govreform-bounces at cabforum.org> On Behalf Of Kirk Hall via
Govreform
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 4:04 PM
To: CA/Browser Forum Governance WG List <govreform at cabforum.org>
Cc: Frank Corday <FCorday at trustwave.com>
Subject: [cabf_governance] Ballot FORUM-4 v3

 

Dimitris, Tim, Ben - can you add the issue raised by Frank below to the
running list we have of Bylaws problems to fix?

 

Thanks, Frank.

 

Kirk

 

From: Servercert-wg [mailto:servercert-wg-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of
Frank Corday via Servercert-wg
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 1:19 PM
To: Doug Beattie <doug.beattie at globalsign.com
<mailto:doug.beattie at globalsign.com> >; CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG
Public Discussion List <servercert-wg at cabforum.org
<mailto:servercert-wg at cabforum.org> >; CABFPub <public at cabforum.org
<mailto:public at cabforum.org> >
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: [Servercert-wg] Ballot FORUM-4 v3

 

Trustwave votes No to Ballot FORUM-4 v3.

 

Unfortunately, in conducting our final review, we noticed "days" was deleted
as a part of the redline in section 2.3 (c) in explaining the timeline for
the discussion period.  We appreciate the hard work put into this ballot.
We certainly would not want to see this effort delayed.  However, as is, the
sentence could be confusing without "days" or "calendar days" reintroduced
to limit ambiguity.

 

From: Servercert-wg <servercert-wg-bounces at cabforum.org
<mailto:servercert-wg-bounces at cabforum.org> > On Behalf Of Tim Hollebeek via
Servercert-wg
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2018 2:50 PM
To: CABFPub <public at cabforum.org <mailto:public at cabforum.org> >;
servercert-wg at cabforum.org <mailto:servercert-wg at cabforum.org> 
Subject: [Servercert-wg] Ballot FORUM-4 v3

 

 

As no additional typos or mistakes appear to have been found in the proposed
redline, Ballot FORUM-4 v2 is hereby withdrawn, and this new Ballot FORUM-4
v3 submitted in its place.  Apologies for not including the latest ETSI
fixes; I really wanted to include them, but I'm just worried that discussion
may not be over yet.

 

Ballot FORUM-4 v3: Fix mistakes made during passage of Governance Reform
Ballot 206

 

Purpose of Ballot

 

The Governance Reform ballot (Ballot 206 under the old ballot numbering
scheme) was extremely complicated and took roughly two years to draft. 

The changes to the Bylaws from Ballot 216 were intended to be included in
the Governance Reform ballot, but were accidentally not included.

 

The attached version of the Bylaws restores the important discussion period
changes that were approved by the members but then accidentally overwritten.

 

The following motion has been proposed by Tim Hollebeek of DigiCert and
endorsed by Wayne Thayer of Mozilla and Moudrick Dadashov of SSC.

 

--- MOTION BEGINS ---

 

This ballot replaces the "Bylaws of the CA/Browser Forum" version 1.9 with
version 2.0 of those Bylaws, attached to this ballot.

 

--- MOTION ENDS ---

 

The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows:

 

Discussion (7 days)

 

Start Time: 2018-09-14, 2:50 pm Eastern Time

 

End Time: 2018-09-21, 2:50 pm Eastern Time

 

Vote for approval (7 days)

 

Start Time: 2018-09-21, 2:50 pm Eastern Time

 

End Time: 2018-09-28, 2:50 pm Eastern Time

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/govreform/attachments/20180928/7847be25/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4940 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/govreform/attachments/20180928/7847be25/attachment-0001.p7s>