[cabfpub] Draft ballot to create the SSL Performance Working Group

[Ben Wilson]

It seems the bylaws require a "ballot."  The only procedure for ballots in the bylaws is in Section 2.2.  Interestingly, however, section 2.1(c) for voting on new members does not use the word "ballot."  Instead, it says it is a "vote" held "as soon as the Applicant indicates that it has presented all information required."  I read that as a less formal voting procedure - especially since it says it is to be held "as soon as ...."  But in this case, I think the safest way to proceed is to follow the bylaws and proceed in accordance with Section 2.2.  Hopefully this section can be amended at some future date.
 

-----Original Message-----
From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy Rowley
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 10:48 AM
To: 'Gervase Markham'; 'CABFPub'
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Draft ballot to create the SSL Performance Working Group

Is a ballot really required?  All of our other working groups were created by a consensus during a phone call.

-----Original Message-----
From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Gervase Markham
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 10:32 AM
To: CABFPub
Subject: [cabfpub] Draft ballot to create the SSL Performance Working Group

At the face-to-face and on the last call, interest was expressed in creating a Working Group to look at issues related to getting the best performance out of an SSL deployment. The aim would be to write one or more best practice documents such that all involved can collaborate to make sure that SSL websites have the best possible performance, so promoting the security and welfare of the web.

On the call, it was noted that section 5.3 of the Bylaws requires a ballot in order to create a WG. This is a draft ballot for this purpose.
We've not created a working group from a ballot before, so comments on how it is best done would be most welcome.

Also, if you are interested in endorsing this ballot, please let me know.

Gerv



Ballot 109 – Create SSL Performance Working Group

Gervase Markham (Mozilla) made the following motion, endorsed by X from Y and Z from Q:

--- Motion begins ---

The CAB Forum shall create a Working Group, to be known as the SSL Performance Working Group.

Scope: the Working Group shall consider all matters having a bearing on software deployments which use SSL and the Web PKI. Examples might
include: certificate contents, choice of proposed ciphers, webserver configuration, and OCSP configuration.

Deliverables: the Working Group shall produce one or more documents giving best practice guidance for getting the best performance from a SSL deployment which uses the Web PKI. The expectation is that such documentation will be submitted to the Forum for publication as (a) non-binding Forum document(s).

Expiration Date: the Working Group shall expire twenty-seven months ("one EV") from the passing of this resolution, unless extended by a further ballot of the Members, such a ballot to specify the extension period and any necessarily modifications of the scope and deliverables.

... Motion ends ...

The ballot review period comes into effect immediately upon posting today (XXXX) and will close at 2200 UTC on XXXX.  Unless the ballot is withdrawn or modified during the review period, the voting period will start immediately thereafter and will close at 2200 UTC on XXXX.  If the ballot is modified for reasons other than to correct minor typographical errors, then the ballot will be deemed to have been withdrawn.

Votes must be cast by posting an on-list reply to this thread.

A vote in favor of the ballot must indicate a clear 'yes' in the response.

A vote against the ballot must indicate a clear 'no' in the response. A vote to abstain must indicate a clear 'abstain' in the response. Unclear responses will not be counted. The latest vote received from any representative of a voting member before the close of the voting period will be counted.

Voting members are listed here: http://www.cabforum.org/forum.html

In order for the motion to be adopted, two thirds or more of the votes cast by members in the CA category and more than one half of the votes cast by members in the browser category must be in favor. Also, quorum is currently set at XXXX members-- at least six members must participate in the ballot, either by voting in favor, voting against, or by abstaining for the vote to be valid.

_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
Public at cabforum.org
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
Public at cabforum.org
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5453 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20131014/a6830198/attachment.bin