GlobalSign also changes their vote to NO because of the newly identified issues.
Doug > -----Original Message----- > From: Public [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gervase > Markham via Public > Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2017 11:08 AM > To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected]>; Ryan > Sleevi <[email protected]> > Cc: Gervase Markham <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 188 - Clarify use of term "CA" in Baseline > Requirements > > On 01/03/17 07:02, Dimitris Zacharopoulos via Public wrote: > > I can't imagine that Mozilla, Entrust, Globalsign, Digicert (that > > already voted "Yes") didn't read through the ballot and didn't > > consider these misunderstandings. > > Your confidence in me is heartwarming :-), but sadly misplaced. I didn't > notice the issues which Ryan and Peter have raised, but having reread this > thread fairly carefully, I can see that they have a point. > Particularly about the OCSP/"good" thing, which seems like a serious bug. > > I hope that you won't see it as a denigration of your hard work on this > ballot, > but I'm afraid we have to change our vote. > > Mozilla now votes NO. > > I would like to make a concrete suggestion as to the way forward. It seems to > me like this very important task of fixing the BRs and other documents to > have consistent language falls into two parts: > > a) making a sane and consistent set of definitions; and > b) making the document use them consistently. > > Might it make sense to do a) as the full Forum, and get agreement on the > definition set, before re-attempting b)? And when b) is re-attempted, we > may find that it's impossible in some cases to express what the BRs currently > say using the sane and consistent set of definitions created in a). This is > likely > to be a bug in the BRs. We can then decide on a case-by-case basis whether > to craft "custom language" to keep the bug and fix it later, or have the > ballot > fix the bug as well as fixing the language. > > It may actually be that the work of a) turns into an RFC 7719-like document > for the WebPKI. > > Gerv > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > [email protected] > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > [email protected] > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
