[cabfpub] Ballots 154 and 155 - Convert to RFC 3647 Framework and GitHub
kirk_hall at trendmicro.com
kirk_hall at trendmicro.com
Tue Nov 3 17:07:40 MST 2015
Ben - would you consider adding the following sentence to each ballot?
"A version of each ballot and each document as amended by time to time by the Forum will also be published as .pdf and .doc documents for ease of use by Forum members and by the public."
I think you have said that is the plan, but it would help build support for these ballots if we know that will happen.
Also, do we need to set up expectations about who will be using GitHub? We only had a brief demonstration by Ryan at the Zurich face to face meeting, and it looked confusing to me (compared to the traditional way of showing changes to existing language, bold/underlined for new language, lined out for deleted language, etc.). Also, if I understood correctly, GitHub uses colors (red/green) to show changes - I know we have some color blind members, so that may be problematic.
Is it your expectation that all Forum members will get training on GitHub is they want to pull copies of documents, or propose ballots? If so, we should discuss that before proceeding on the ballots - I don't think that's practical. Plus, will the public have access to GitHub if they want to see the documents, or copy them? If yes, how do we control access (it won't be like a wiki, will it?). If not, how does the public get copies of the latest ballots or the most current version of a guideline? How do we train the public on how to use GitHub in relationship to these documents?
It might be wiser to hold back on these ballots and do some demonstrations for Forum Members first, and even try running these documents on GitHub for a few months before locking this into a ballot - make it separate from the conversion to RFC 3647 format (plus, I thought there was some opposition to changing the EVGL to RFC 3647 format, as virtually everything will be in Sec. 3.2 in that format?)
From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 11:46 AM
Subject: [cabfpub] Ballots 154 and 155 - Convert to RFC 3647 Framework and GitHub
Ballots 154 and 155 - Convert to RFC 3647 Framework and GitHub
The Certificate Policy Review Working Group was chartered by Ballot 128 to (i) consider existing and proposed standards, (ii) create a list of potential improvements based on the considered standards that improve the existing CAB Forum work product, (iii) evaluate the transition to a 3647 format based on the amount of work involved.
The CP Review WG has met and concluded that the best path forward for the Forum is to complete a conversion to the RFC 3647 framework for the EV Guidelines and the Network and Certificate System Security Requirements and to post them on GitHub as the canonical versions of those documents.
Ben Wilson of DigiCert makes the following motions, and Dean Coclin from Symantec and Gerv Markham from Mozilla have endorsed them.
- - - - Motion for Ballot 154 - - - -
Be it resolved that the CA / Browser Forum directs the Certificate Policy Review Working Group to prepare a version of the EV Guidelines that moves existing content into the RFC 3647 format;
Be it further resolved that the CA / Browser Forum also directs the Certificate Policy Review Working Group to post the RFC-3647-formatted EV Guidelines on GitHub to serve, upon formal adoption by the Forum in a future ballot, as the canonical version of the EV Guidelines.
- - - - Motion Ends - - - -
- - - - Motion for Ballot 155 - - - -
Be it resolved that the CA / Browser Forum directs the Certificate Policy Review Working Group to prepare a version of the Network and Certificate System Security Requirements that moves existing content into the RFC 3647 format;
Be it further resolved that the CA / Browser Forum also directs the Certificate Policy Review Working Group to post the RFC-3647-formatted Network and Certificate System Security Requirements on GitHub to serve, upon formal adoption by the Forum in a future ballot, as the canonical version of the Network and Certificate System Security Requirements.
- - - - Motion Ends - - - -
The review period for these ballots shall commence at 2200 UTC on Tuesday, 3 November 2015 and will close at 2200 UTC on Tuesday, 10 November 2015. Unless the motion is withdrawn during the review period, the voting period will start immediately thereafter and will close at 2200 UTC on Tuesday, 17 November 2015.
Votes must be cast by posting an on-list reply to this thread. A vote in favor of each ballot must indicate a clear 'yes' in the response. A vote against each 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: https://cabforum.org/members/. 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. Quorum is currently nine (9) members- at least nine members must participate in the ballot, either by voting in favor, voting against, or by abstaining for the vote to be valid.
TREND MICRO EMAIL NOTICE
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential
and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or
disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or
telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Public