[cabfpub] [EXTERNAL]Re: Ballot 203: Formation of Network Security Working Group

[Ryan Sleevi]

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 5:07 PM, Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>
wrote:

> In (partial) response to Virginia's concern -- this is an "old style"
> working group of the whole Forum (to work on an issue), and not a "new
> style" working group under the Governance WG's definition.  (I think we
> will call these subcommittees or similar in the future).
>

But it's not one consistent with the bylaws, Kirk. That's an extremely
important point, and I'm happy to explain further why it's troubling.


> I'd say let's just go forward with Gerv's draft so we can get going -- I
> doubt there will be any real controversy once the new WG starts its work.
> We have actually discussed this a few times.


The controversy is, regrettably common these days, over the application of
the Bylaws, which are of course key for ensuring the protections of our IP
policy and our overall level of progress, even if they are inconvenient.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170605/d3a3a6a6/attachment-0003.html>