[cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 206 - Amendment to IPR Policy & Bylaws re Working Group Formation

[Tim Hollebeek]

Yes, that last part is what I’m concerned about.  We said they need to be re-chartered within 6 months, but I think we dropped the ball on including a mechanism to do so.

 

-Tim

 

From: Wayne Thayer [mailto:wthayer at mozilla.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 9:32 AM
To: Tim Hollebeek <tim.hollebeek at digicert.com>
Cc: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 206 - Amendment to IPR Policy & Bylaws re Working Group Formation

 

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 7:56 AM, Tim Hollebeek <tim.hollebeek at digicert.com <mailto:tim.hollebeek at digicert.com> > wrote:


What are we going to do about continuity of existing working groups (old terminology, not new)?  Is it necessary for the Server Certificate Working Group Charter to say anything about sub-working groups (I wish we hadn't used the existing term "working group" to mean something new, it is going to be very confusing).

Section 5.3.4 states that "legacy" working groups can be terminated immediately or must be rechartered within 6 months.

 

There is no such thing as a "sub-working group" under the new bylaws. I think this means that there is no mechanism for an existing WG like Validation or Network Security to bring a proposal to the Server Certificate WG for discussion and voting?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180116/1e122587/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4940 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180116/1e122587/attachment-0003.p7s>