[cabfpub] Ballot 203: Formation of Network Security Working Group
sleevi at google.com
Mon Jun 5 14:14:49 UTC 2017
That seems a sort of broadly worded expiration, and one that would be hard
For example, if a single ratification fails, is the WG expired? If the WG
never tries to ratify a proposal, does the WG expire? If the WG makes a
single proposal - while others are still being worked on - does the WG
Looking at the bylaws, Section 5.3 makes it clear that there's a "Working
Group expiration _date_" (emphasis added). From the past discussions
regarding the scope and nature of WGs - including the F2F discussion in
Raleigh - and borrowing from other SDOs, perhaps it would be more fruitful
and worthwhile to set an explicit date, one year out.
If the WG is able to come to a proposal before then, fantastic. We could
always shutter the WG (by virtue of no meetings) if that happens.
If the WG is unable to come to a proposal with a year of deliberation, then
that's unfortunate, but not the end of the world. The Forum can take stock
of the participation and progress, and hold another ballot to either extend
the WG or use it as a forcing function for a proposal.
Are there any limitations to the WG? For example, will the WG only consider
updates to the Network Security Controls? Is it considering updates to all
documents? Is it trying to provide the documents themselves, or is it
simply trying to make proposals for them?
On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 2:47 AM, Gervase Markham via Public <
public at cabforum.org> wrote:
> *Ballot 203: Formation of Network Security Working Group*
> Purpose of Ballot: To form a Network Security Working Group to re-evaluate
> the CAB Forum's Network Security Guidelines.
> The following motion has been proposed by Gervase Markham of Mozilla and
> endorsed by Jeremy Rowley of DigiCert and Moudrick Dadashov of SSC:
> *-- MOTION BEGINS --*
> In accordance with Section 5.3 of the CA/B Forum Bylaws, the chartering of
> a new Working Group requires a ballot. This ballot charters the Network
> Security Working Group.
> The CAB Forum's Network Security Guidelines were adopted in August 2012
> but have not been updated since. Significant doubts have been raised as to
> their fitness for purpose in 2017. Therefore, the Working Group’s charter
> will be as follows:
> 1. Consider options for revising, replacing or scrapping the Network
> Security Guidelines.
> 1. An extensive report with one or more proposals for the future of the
> Network Security Guidelines.
> 2. For proposals involving replacement with an existing framework or
> standard, details of the availability and applicability of the proposed
> alternative, and what modifications if any would be needed to it in order
> to make it suitable for use.
> 3. For proposals involving revision, details of the revisions that are
> deemed necessary and how the document will be kept current in the future.
> 4. For proposals involving scrapping, an explanation of why this is
> preferable to either of the other two options.
> 5. If there are multiple proposals, optionally a recommendation as to
> which one to pursue and an associated timeline.
> 6. A form of ballot or ballots to implement any recommendations.
> The Working Group shall expire once the deliverables have been completed,
> or if the group agrees that it cannot achieve the 2/3rds endorsement
> required by the bylaws for any proposal.
> *-- MOTION ENDS --*
> The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows:
> BALLOT 203
> Start time (22:00 UTC)
> End time (22:00 UTC)
> Discussion (7 to 14 days)
> 5th June
> 12th June
> Vote for approval (7 days)
> 12th June
> 19th June
> Votes must be cast by posting an on-list reply to this thread on the
> Public list. A vote in favor of the motion must indicate a clear 'yes' in
> the response. A vote against 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:
> In order for the motion to be adopted, two thirds or more of the votes
> cast by members in the CA category and greater than 50% of the votes cast
> by members in the browser category must be in favor. Quorum is shown on
> CA/Browser Forum wiki. Under Bylaw 2.2(g), at least the required quorum
> number must participate in the ballot for the ballot to be valid, either by
> voting in favor, voting against, or abstaining.
> Public mailing list
> Public at cabforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Public