On 03/05/17 07:08, Dimitris Zacharopoulos via Public wrote: > I think Gerv's proposal > (https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2017-April/010804.html) is a big > improvement because some validation information is harder to acquire > than others. Methods that can be automated (like 3.2.2.4.6 or 3.2.2.4.7) > could re-use information for a lot less than 13 months.
I think that even if the ballot goes with having the same policy for all methods, the organizational split I mentioned would be valuable because in the future, individual methods may be updated one at a time, and we will want to write custom legacy data reuse policies at that point. Gerv _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
