[cabfpub] Preballot - Revised Ballot 190

[Gervase Markham]

On 17/05/17 17:24, Ryan Sleevi via Public wrote:
> Would you (and Jeremy and Gerv) be receptive to including this in
> 3.2.2.4?

I have no objection; although would it have an effect on achievable
implementation timelines?

> There did not appear to be any objections raised on the list - simply a
> discussion related to policy OIDs versus an extension, but the the
> extension provides a semantically valid approach that minimizes any
> changes to CA infrastructure.

People with more expertise than me can make the call as to which way to
do it :-)

Gerv