[cabfpub] Attendance of Interested Parties at Working Group meetings

James Burton james at sirburton.com
Sat Feb 3 14:39:59 UTC 2018


All invited interested parties could join a video conference feed to watch and interact with the physical meeting and would prevent overcrowding.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dean Coclin [mailto:dean.coclin at digicert.com] 
Sent: 03 February 2018 14:17
To: James Burton <james at sirburton.com>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>; 'Gervase Markham' <gerv at mozilla.org>; 'Kirk Hall' <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>
Subject: RE: [cabfpub] Attendance of Interested Parties at Working Group meetings

My guess is around 20-25.

-----Original Message-----
From: Public [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of James Burton via Public
Sent: Saturday, February 3, 2018 8:50 AM
To: 'Gervase Markham' <gerv at mozilla.org>; 'CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List' <public at cabforum.org>; 'Kirk Hall' <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Attendance of Interested Parties at Working Group meetings

How many interested parties are there currently on this forum? 

-----Original Message-----
From: Public [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Gervase Markham via Public
Sent: 03 February 2018 13:29
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

On 03/02/18 02:49, Kirk Hall via Public wrote:
> 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?_*

Not at all. In the last meeting, we had spare time at the end of the second day anyway.

> 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.”

I would read this as the variant expressed by others - "Forum Meetings"
includes all aspects of the meeting (because any part could become overcrowded), and so clause c) trumps clause a) for WG meetings during Forum Meetings, and so you need to explicitly invite people. But I hope that task will not be too onerous :-)

Gerv
_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
Public at cabforum.org
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4311 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180203/54ab1fea/attachment-0003.p7s>


More information about the Public mailing list