[cabfpub] [cabfman] Ballot [94] - Adoption of CA/Browser Forum Bylaws

[Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.)]

On 11/15/2012 11:40 PM, From kirk_hall at trendmicro.com:
> I just don’t think this is controversial – most of us assumed this was 
> the rule already (that there had to be at least minimal support – one 
> “yes” vote from a browser and one “yes” vote from a CA – for a ballot 
> to pass).  So we are not deleting this new sentence from the proposed 
> Bylaws in Ballot [94].

As for me, I don't think that there ever was such a requirement, but I 
do think that it makes sense. If a change to the guidelines doesn't 
provide any benefit to the relying parties (e.g. browsers) then it might 
be questionable if it's really necessary or if it's just something some 
CAs would like to have. If it's not supported by the CAs, it might be 
questionable too, even though all the browsers together couldn't 
probably get a quorum anyway...


Regards
Signer: 	Eddy Nigg, COO/CTO
	StartCom Ltd. <http://www.startcom.org>
XMPP: 	startcom at startcom.org <xmpp:startcom at startcom.org>
Blog: 	Join the Revolution! <http://blog.startcom.org>
Twitter: 	Follow Me <http://twitter.com/eddy_nigg>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20121115/690b30e6/attachment-0004.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4540 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20121115/690b30e6/attachment-0002.p7s>