On b) treating CAs with equality.
MF is a private organisation, with the goal of delivering (secure) software to its users. It owes nothing to CAs, neither fairness nor responsibility.
The only reason to treat CAs fairly would be if it assisted in goal a) which it may very well do.
Your point has some validity, hence should be addressed. I see treating CAs equally (as much as that's possible) as useful in part because it makes it easier to justify policy decisions and reach consensus on them, vs. adopting a policy that intentionally discriminates against particular CAs either by name or as a class. It also happens to be the case that the Mozilla Foundation, while a private organization, nevertheless as a non-profit organization with special tax status by law has an obligation to serve some public purpose, and nondiscrimination in this and other matters is IMO consistent with that.
Frank
-- Frank Hecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ mozilla-crypto mailing list [email protected] http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-crypto
