[cabfpub] Ballot 185 - Limiting the Lifetime of Certificates
scott at scottrea.com
Mon Feb 13 20:05:09 UTC 2017
Just a process question Ryan, trying to understand how the CAB processes
I understand that minor changes are at the discretion of ballot
producers and endorsers, and you have posted an update to this ballot
under that pretext - my question is just about how the "minor"
designation is arrived at by the producers and endorsers.
You indicated that there was "...general agreement that postponing the
effective date represents a 'minor' change", but I only saw Gerv's post
and then you made the change. So my question is about how that "general
agreement" process itself works? If the general agreeing happened on
list between a number of community members, then perhaps I am not seeing
the full list digest. Or did you mean the general agreeing (on the
designation that this was minor) was just you and Gerv and happened offlist?
To be clear, I have no issue with the changes for this ballot, just
trying to understand in a general sense for future ballots how this
minor designation process works.
On 2/13/2017 11:36 AM, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand the nature or purpose of your
> question, so I'm not sure how to effectively answer it.
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Scott Rea <scott at scottrea.com
> <mailto:scott at scottrea.com>> wrote:
> G'day Ryan,
> I think I must have missed the "general agreement" posts on the list.
> Minor changes are the discretion of ballot producers and endorsers, did
> this "general agreement" you are referring to happen off list? Who was
> involved in the "general agreement" process?
> On 2/13/2017 11:05 AM, Ryan Sleevi via Public wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Dean Coclin via Public
> > <public at cabforum.org <mailto:public at cabforum.org>
> <mailto:public at cabforum.org <mailto:public at cabforum.org>>> wrote:
> > Minor changes to ballots have traditionally been allowed in the
> > forum. "Minor" has been left to the discretion of the ballot
> > producer/endorsers but we've seldom seen controversy over that.
> > It seems that there's general agreement that postponing the effective
> > date represents a 'minor' change, for purposes of Ballot formation, and
> > does not require restarting the discussion and/or voting periods. To
> > that end, I will repost to the public list a revised form which takes
> > into Gerv's remarks about what an appropriate _Baseline_ requirement is.
> > Recognizing that such proposals are inherently a baseline, rather than
> > best practice, and recognizing that different browsers / root stores may
> > have more stringent security requirements, it doesn't undermine the
> > Ballot to acknowledge that, but neither should it be seen as an
> > endorsement that this is the 'best practice' timeframe for deployment.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Public mailing list
> > Public at cabforum.org <mailto:Public at cabforum.org>
> > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
> Scott Rea, MSc, CISSP
> Ph# (801) 874-4114 <tel:%28801%29%20874-4114>
Scott Rea, MSc, CISSP
Ph# (801) 874-4114
More information about the Public