[cabfpub] Ballot SC10 – Establishing the Network Security Subcommittee of the SCWG
Ryan Sleevi
sleevi at google.com
Fri Sep 14 00:43:20 UTC 2018
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 8:39 PM Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>
wrote:
> Thanks for the list, Wayne. Responses inline. Remember, a Subcommittee
> has no real power, it’s just a place where members interested in a subject
> who want to be involved in drafting proposals for the whole SCWG can work
> together – we have 10+ years of successful experience with this approach,
> and are just continuing it at the SCWG level.
>
>
>
> [Wayne] To respond to Kirk's question about subjects that need to be
> better defined, here is a start:
>
>
>
> * Do Subcommittees have Chairs and if so how are they appointed? [KH]
> Yes, for the same reason we had Chairs for old-style Working Groups of the
> Forum. There is no change here (BTW, our Bylaws didn’t include rules for
> old WG Chairs either – somehow it all worked out). Dean has correctly
> listed what a Chair does.
>
This answer doesn't suffice, because our new Bylaws do change things
substantially, and the reasons for the old structure of WGs doesn't just
naturally change to SCWGs.
> * How are Subcommittees chartered? (are they chartered?) [KH] Same as in
> the past when we created old-style WGs of the Forum – by ballots, in this
> case SCWG ballots. No change here.
>
This is half correct, but misses the point of the question. The SCWG is
responsible for defining how Subcommittees are created, per our Bylaws -
and it has not. Yet.
> * What are the required contents of a Subcommittee charter? [KH] Same as
> in the past when we created old-style WGs of the Forum – by ballot
> language. We never had problems in drafting the ballots that created old
> WGs of the Forum – see Ballots 109, 128, 138, 143, 165, and 203. No change
> here. What problem do you see from following our past procedure?
>
Obviously, there's nothing you can point to support this interpretation,
and your interpretation itself isn't supported by the Bylaws, because the
SCWG does not define what you just stated.
>
>
> * How are Subcommittees operated? [KH] In the same fashion as old WGs of
> the Forum were operated – teleconferences and informal procedures. No
> change here.
>
Again, this is not consistent with the Bylaws. This is your proposed path,
but this is not the defined path.
>
>
> * What information is public/private? Do they have their own mailing
> lists? [KH] Same as the way information was handled for the old WGs of the
> Forum – I think old WG information has always been posted to the Public
> list, so the new Subcommittees will simply post to the SCWG list, which is
> public. No change here.
>
Again, this is not consistent with the Bylaws. This is your proposed path,
but this is not the defined path.
> * How are Subcommittees dissolved? [KH] In the same fashion as old WGs of
> the Forum were handled. If a Subcommittee has no work to do, it can stop
> meeting until it has more work, or I suppose we can have a new ballot to
> dissolve the Subcommittee, if we care. Most Subcommittees will have
> ongoing work to do (Validation, NetSec), so should be perpetual. We may
> create other Subcommittees that should have a specific termination date in
> the ballot that creates the Subcommittee it if we believe that is
> appropriate, as we did once in the past. No change here.
>
>
Again, this is not consistent with the Bylaws. This is your proposed path,
but this is not the defined path.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180913/5821feeb/attachment-0003.html>
More information about the Public
mailing list