[cabfpub] Assigning ballot numbers - WAS: Ballot 212: Canonicalise formal name of the Baseline Requirements

Fri Sep 8 15:50:18 UTC 2017

If as a practice we are assigning ballot numbers to a ballot that does not yet have a proposer and two endorsers we should stop that.  It’s not officially a ballot until that happens and throwing a number on a discussion topic, even one which is in the form of a ballot, just causes confusion.

From: Public [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Kirk Hall via Public
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 9:50 AM
To: Jos Purvis (jopurvis) <jopurvis at cisco.com>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>; Gervase Markham <gerv at mozilla.org>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 212: Canonicalise formal name of the Baseline Requirements

My apologies – I thought it was a pre-ballot.

Entrust votes yes

From: Public [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Jos Purvis (jopurvis) via Public
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 6:48 AM
To: Gervase Markham <gerv at mozilla.org <mailto:gerv at mozilla.org> >; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org <mailto:public at cabforum.org> >
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 212: Canonicalise formal name of the Baseline Requirements

Perhaps I missed the discussion of this on last week’s call, but is this ballot currently in the voting period or did it get held up at some point? It has a number and sponsors and we appear to have had some brief discussion on the list about it, but I’ve literally seen no one vote for it, so I’m wondering if it’s stuck and the discussion/voting period dates should be adjusted, or if no one has submitted a vote on it yet. :)

-- 

Jos Purvis (jopurvis at cisco.com <mailto:jopurvis at cisco.com> )

.:|:.:|:. cisco systems  | Cryptographic Services

PGP: 0xFD802FEE07D19105  | +1 919.991.9114 (desk)

From: Public <public-bounces at cabforum.org <mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org> > on behalf of Gervase Markham via Public <public at cabforum.org <mailto:public at cabforum.org> >
Reply-To: Gervase Markham <gerv at mozilla.org <mailto:gerv at mozilla.org> >, CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org <mailto:public at cabforum.org> >
Date: Friday, 18 August, 2017 at 11:06 
To: CABFPub <public at cabforum.org <mailto:public at cabforum.org> >
Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 212: Canonicalise formal name of the Baseline Requirements

Ballot 212: Canonicalise formal name of the Baseline Requirements 

Purpose of Ballot: to make the formal name of the Baseline Requirements document clear, as use is not currently consistent.

The following motion has been proposed by Gervase Markham of Mozilla and endorsed by Jeremy Rowley of DigiCert and Ryan Sleevi of Google: 

-- MOTION BEGINS -- 

The official name of the Baseline Requirements document shall be 'The Baseline Requirements for the Issuance and Management of Publicly-Trusted Certificates'. Approved abbreviations for official use are "the Baseline Requirements", and "the BRs".

Editors and maintainers of CAB Forum documents and websites are empowered to update text under their control at any time to make this so.

-- MOTION ENDS -- 

The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows: 

Start time (22:00 UTC) 

End time (22:00 UTC) 

Discussion (7 to 14 days) 

18 Aug

25 Aug

Vote for approval (7 days) 

25 Aug

1 Sep

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: https://cabforum.org/members/ 

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. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170908/b28b336f/attachment-0002.html>