[cabfpub] BRs section 9.16.3 (exception for laws)
gerv at mozilla.org
Tue May 3 04:21:44 MST 2016
On 02/05/16 18:27, Jeremy Rowley wrote:
> The one item I don't like is the "detailed message" as it's not clear what
> constitutes a detailed message. I suspect whether something is "detailed" is
> not auditable? Unfortunately, I don't have a good suggestion except to list
> out what we want the message to include.
Remove "detailed", add "explaining"?
The parties involved SHALL notify the CA / Browser Forum by sending a
message to questions at cabforum.org explaining the facts, circumstances,
and law(s) involved, ...?
More information about the Public