On 25/1/2017 1:40 μμ, Dimitris Zacharopoulos wrote:
On 25/1/2017 1:25 μμ, Gervase Markham wrote:
On 24/01/17 06:50, Dimitris Zacharopoulos wrote:
The CA/B Forum Policy Review WG made some effort
<https://cabforum.org/pipermail/policyreview/2016-April/000272.html> to
clarify this by merging information between these sections, but there
was not enough support to proceed.
Dean's summary of the voting for ballot 167 contained the line: "It is
my understanding that the ballot proponents are preparing a revised
ballot that addresses some comments received during the voting period."
Is that still true?
Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy
There wasn't enough support to proceed with these changes within the
WG to even form a ballot, so we dropped them and decided to proceed
with only minor changes. I think Ryan raised a concern that he would
like the "Name Forms" section, to remain separate. I would still
prefer to keep everything simple and aligned together with the CA
Certificates, because IMHO it is easier to configure (CA's side) and
audit (Auditor's side) the certificate profiles by looking one section
of the BRs instead of many.
Dimitris.
_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy
167 "Baseline Requirements Corrections" did not pass due to lack quorum
and was resubmitted as ballot 168 "Baseline Requirements Corrections
(Revised)" which passed unanimously.
Dimitris.
_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy
