[cabfpub] Attendance of Interested Parties at Working Group meetings

[Tim Hollebeek]

I expressed concern about running other WGs in parallel with VWG since I
participate in all of them, but I can withdraw my objection with respect to
the Governance WG if that helps.

 

-Tim

 

From: Public [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Dean Coclin
via Public
Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 8:38 PM
To: Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>; CA/Browser Forum Public
Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Attendance of Interested Parties at Working Group
meetings

 

The original intent of the bylaws stating that people other than members
needed a chair invitation to attend F2F meetings was, as you state, to
insure the meeting size didn't get out of control lest we need an auditorium
for the meetings.  The WG meetings are a part of the F2F. I think it's clear
that anyone other than a member cannot attend w/o an invitation. Having said
that, according to the wiki, we are at 34 signed up for the meeting, hence
there is capacity for additional people (assuming there isn't a rush of sign
ups the last week). I would encourage members that are attending to insure
they are on the wiki list by next week. 

 

Regarding the all day validation group meeting, I think that is fine, given
that they have some critical items to discuss. Would it be possible to also
hold the Governance meeting the same day?  I don't think many of the
Governance people are in the Validation group and hence we can be more
efficient by doing those two on Tuesday. You could then do a policy and net
sec working group on Weds.  Just a suggestion.


Dean

 

From: Public [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Kirk Hall via
Public
Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 8:50 PM
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org
<mailto:public at cabforum.org> >
Subject: [cabfpub] Attendance of Interested Parties at Working Group
meetings

 

I previously agreed with Wayne that an all-day VWG meeting in Herndon, VA on
Tuesday, March 6 is a good idea - but we will have to push other WG meetings
to later, maybe Wednesday morning.  Does anyone object to this plan?

 

On the question of attendance (in person or by phone) by Interested Parties
at the special VWG meeting - I have pasted in the relevant part of Bylaw 3.2
below.  If you had asked me what I thought it meant, I would have said "IPs
can only come to the full Forum meetings at the invitation of the Chair, but
they can come to Working Group meetings (teleconferences and face-to-face
meetings) without an invitation from the Chair - it's at their option."  

 

That's what I thought sub (a) meant by "becoming involved" in Working
Groups, whereas I believed sub (c) only applies to participation in "Forum
Teleconferences and Forum Meetings" - which I thought meant the meetings of
the full Forum itself.  As I recall, we didn't want the full Forum meetings
to grow to 100 people or more, perhaps with many more Interested Parties in
attendance than CAs and browsers - that seemed unmanageable from a logistics
standpoint.  Hence the need for a little gatekeeping and specific
invitations.

 

Here is the language from the Bylaws:

 

Interested Parties may participate in Forum activities in the following
ways:

 

(a) By becoming involved in Working Groups,

 

(b) By posting to the Public Mail List, and

 

(c) By participating in those portions of Forum Teleconferences and Forum
Meetings to

which they are invited by the Forum Chair relating to their areas of special
expertise or

the subject of their Working Group participation.

 

In any case, I will happily "invite" any Interested Party who wants to be
involved in the VWG meeting on March 6, if necessary.  

 

Or would it be better if we permanently adopt my interpretation above - that
no invitation from the Chair is needed for Interested Parties to attend WG
meetings at their own option?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180205/e006f02e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4940 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180205/e006f02e/attachment.p7s>