[cabfpub] CAA working group description

[Jacob Hoffman-Andrews]

With respect, I would suggest that there is already a CAA working group:
the IETF LAMPS WG at https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/lamps/charter/. It has
the advantage of being open for anyone to join and post, so CAs can more
easily have conversations with Subscribers and Relying Parties. If half of
the CAA conversation happens in LAMPS and half happens here, it will be
harder for Subscribers and Relying Parties to fully participate.

I'd definitely encourage anyone in the CA/Browser Forum who is interested
in CAA issues to join the LAMPS mailing list at
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm (confusingly, the mailing list
is named SPASM, a holdover from an earlier name).

I think it's likely there will be another ballot or two in the CA/Browser
Forum clarifying some of the language we use to incorporate CAA, but I
think the amount of work is not enough to justify splitting out a second
working group.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20171005/b96e3834/attachment.html>