[cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 146 - Convert Baseline Requirements to RFC 3647 Framework

Dean Coclin Dean_Coclin at symantec.com
Thu Mar 5 19:43:48 UTC 2015

While it may be true that she would have a one-time task to update the policy and wiki pages, the long term benefit is to relying parties, auditors and perhaps other root program owners that need to compare BRs to CPs and CPS documents.  But thanks for clarifying Mozilla's position.

-----Original Message-----
From: Gervase Markham [mailto:gerv at mozilla.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 11:13 AM
To: Dean Coclin; kirk_hall at trendmicro.com; Ben Wilson; CABFPub
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 146 - Convert Baseline Requirements to RFC 3647 Framework

On 24/02/15 16:59, Dean Coclin wrote:
> Some of the beneficiaries are Browser root programs and relying parties.
> Having the BRs in this format makes it easier for Jody, Kathleen and 
> others to review CPS’ and compare to the sections in the BRs for 
> compliance.

I checked with Kathleen about this; she said:

"This is not something I asked for. I suspect that whoever asked for it thought that it would be nice for the BRs to line up with the way most CP/CPS documents are organized. But, it doesn't really matter to me.

If they change the ordering and the section numbering of the BRs, then I will have to update Mozilla's CA Certificate Policy and a bunch of wiki pages. So, it would be extra busy work for me."

So Mozilla is not against this change if other stakeholders see strong value in it, but we are not requesting it for ourselves.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6130 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20150305/8190a5d1/attachment-0001.p7s>

More information about the Public mailing list