[cabfpub] Ballot 195 - CAA Fixup is in the DISCUSSION period (ends April 10)

[philliph at comodo.com]

> On Apr 10, 2017, at 2:04 PM, Ryan Sleevi via Public <public at cabforum.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:39 PM, Gervase Markham via Public <public at cabforum.org <mailto:public at cabforum.org>> wrote:
> On 10/04/17 17:27, Phillip Hallam-Baker via Public wrote:
> > As I proposed earlier, can we amend this so that instead of saying:
> >
> > "CAs MUST process the issue, issuewild, and iodef property tags as
> > specified in RFC 6844, although they are not required to act on the
> > contents of the iodef property tag."
> >
> > We say
> >
> > "CAs MUST process the issue, issuewild, and iodef property tags as
> > specified in RFC 6844 as updated by errata 4992, although they are not
> > required to act on the contents of the iodef property tag."
> 
> Can you explain how IETF errata work? Surely it must be the case that
> unadorned references to RFC 6844 actually mean "RFC 6844 as updated by
> any errata"? Otherwise, every reference would have to be updated every
> time there was an erratum, which rather defeats the point of an erratum
> process (as opposed to issueing a whole new, fixed RFC).
> 
> Only if they're accepted. Some errata remain "Hold for Document Update" meaning they would semantically change the document, require further discussion and WG chartering, and would not be in force.
> 
> So no, it doesn't mean what you described :)
> 
> I also don't think we should hold for PHB's errata. We've already seen there are issues with it. I think it's important and proper to discuss and continue discussing, but I don't think it's worth holding this ballot up on. I have yet to hear how proceeding with this ballot negatively impacts that other ballot, other than it'd be nice if they were together. But ballots are/should be "cheap", and there's no reason to link the two, given their lack of conflict.

I updated the errata in response to the typo.

I don’t think that changing the description completely would be in order though. 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170410/ed75f4c4/attachment-0003.html>