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

Dean Coclin Dean_Coclin at symantec.com
Sun Mar 15 00:18:06 UTC 2015

We'll take this feedback into account in the working group.  Good discussion
this week. THANKS to all.


-----Original Message-----
From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On
Behalf Of Gervase Markham
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 7:37 PM
To: Ryan Sleevi; Ben Wilson
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 146 - Convert Baseline Requirements to RFC
3647 Framework

On 10/03/15 22:50, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> On Mar 10, 2015 10:43 PM, "Ben Wilson" <ben.wilson at digicert.com 
> <mailto:ben.wilson at digicert.com>> wrote:
>> I forgot to mention.  The current plan is to adopt these, then add in
> the EV Guidelines for SSL, and then add in the Network Security 
> requirements, and then code signing, ETSI/NIST language, etc.  A 
> benefit of this plan is a reduction in the number of documents we have to
> I am at a loss to understand why that is at all a good thing.

Yes, this seems surprising to me too. Reformatting the BRs in another format
is one thing; combining all the CABF documents into a single document is
quite another. The former, we'll go along with if others want it. The
latter, not.

Multiple documents is a feature when you are addressing multiple audiences.


Public mailing list
Public at cabforum.org
-------------- 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/20150314/797a8395/attachment-0001.p7s>

More information about the Public mailing list