On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Gervase Markham via Public < [email protected]> wrote:
> On 09/03/17 14:08, Phillip Hallam-Baker via Public wrote: > > Lets hold off on a followup ballot until after I can talk to the IETF > > Security ADs in Chicago at the end of the month. > > > > I would like us to decide exactly what handling we want for CNAME and > > DNAME and ensure the spec is completely clear and unambiguous. > > I am not unwilling to hold off, but surely the results of such > discussions would be reflected in an RFC erratum, not in the CAB Forum > documents? I too am uncertain the benefits of holding off. Even if we were to accept that such a discussion belonged in the CA/Browser Forum documents - although, like Gerv, I believe better reflected through the IETF consensus process in IETF documents - I'm uncertain why we shouldn't correct the minor error now, and leave that for a ballot later, especially should it generate any controversy.
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
