[Servercert-wg] Draft Ballot for Cleanups

Ryan Sleevi sleevi at google.com
Mon Oct 21 10:35:29 MST 2019

On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 1:15 PM Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) <
dzacharo at harica.gr> wrote:

> The BRs are supposed to be guidelines for CAs that want to issue
> publicly-trusted certificates and for Relying Parties to be able to verify
> these Certificates. We want good guidance to come from these documents as
> if there were no Root programs.

I'm not sure who the "we" is, but this certainly is not a universally
shared value.

> If the BRs were "perfect", some Root programs wouldn't need to have
> additional requirements.

This is a particular problematic statement. It's extremely useful to
understanding your perspective and the concern with 1.1, and I would hate
that a Cleanup Ballot would become the means of litigating this, so I'd
like to suggest we table it, for now. The best I can say is that the view
advanced here has been a leading cause of problems, and is not one shared.

However, consistent with our Bylaws, we need to emphasize that these
requirements - and the CA/Browser Forum - does not impose anything upon any
one. I hope you can see that the statement, as it exists, is wholly in line
with our existing Bylaws.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/attachments/20191021/3b415494/attachment.html>

More information about the Servercert-wg mailing list