[cabfpub] Draft Agenda for F2F Taipei Oct. 3-5 for review

[Kirk Hall]

Jeremy, we spoke before and you suggested a fairly brief Validation Working Group report at the plenary session - and I agree we don't want to reproduce everything that happened in the WG again in the main session.  But it might be worthwhile go provide a fairly detailed list of the issues the Validation WG is working on during your update report as there's lots of interest in this subject.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeremy Rowley [mailto:jeremy.rowley at digicert.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 7:00 AM
To: Gervase Markham <gerv at mozilla.org>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
Cc: Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: [cabfpub] Draft Agenda for F2F Taipei Oct. 3-5 for review

Thus is on the agenda for the validation working group. 

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 5:37 AM, Gervase Markham via Public <public at cabforum.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 24/09/17 00:45, Kirk Hall via Public wrote:
>> Please review the draft Agenda below, and offer comments and new 
>> topics - as you see, we still have some open time on both days.
> 
> I think we should have a discussion about follow-ons to ballot 190. 
> Lots of things got pushed off so we could get the validation methods 
> back into the document, and may of those improvements added 
> significant value. Now the methods are back in there, we should triage 
> all the improvement suggestions and get a sense of how controversial 
> each is, so we can pass another ballot reasonably quickly with the 
> uncontroversial ones, and map out a way forward for the more controversial ones.
> 
> Will this happen as part of the Validation WG discussions, or do we 
> need a separate slot for it?
> 
> Gerv
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Public mailing list
> Public at cabforum.org
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public