Why wouldn’t the wiki version constitute a redlined version?
From: Public [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ryan Sleevi via Public Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 6:53 AM To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected]> Cc: Ryan Sleevi <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 191 - Clarify Place of Business Information Thanks Bruce for providing this. It's unclear to me, in light of the discussions around 198 - .onion domains - whether this constitutes a proper ballot, since a redline version was not provided. That is, whether the --( )-- (deletion) __ __ (addition) constitute redlines or not. Assuming we accept it as such (expedience, courtesy, and no one has raised objections to this ballot yet), then I can confirm that Bruce's "redline" version is for the most part consistent with the EVG 1.6.2 and 1.6.3 I say "for the most part" because there's on the city and town line there's the text "EV Guidelines, v. 1.6.3 12", which is the result of a copy/paste issue from the source PDF (it's the footer of the PDF), and not part of the actual text :) Since we have the redline version (from the original ballot, I think we can safely conclude the 'wiki markup' is "sufficient" redline, versus say PDF or word), and a visual version (Bruce's) to make sure it's correct, and it's based on the current EVGs (1.6.2 as last published, 1.6.3 is pending IP review)... Google votes YES On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Bruce Morton via Public <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: Here is a markup of BR section 9.2.7 for ballot 191. Thanks, Bruce. From: Public [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson via Public Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 11:18 AM To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Cc: Ben Wilson <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 191 - Clarify Place of Business Information Just a clarification for everyone, the text below was copied out of the wiki with wiki markup language, so the following text is being deleted --(City, State, and country – Required; Street and postal code - Optional)—(the open and close parentheses with dashes indicates a deletion). From: Public [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jeremy Rowley via Public Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 10:51 AM To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Cc: Jeremy Rowley <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 191 - Clarify Place of Business Information Updated: Ballot 191 - Clarify Place of Business Information Field Inclusion The current EV Guidelines are not clear on what address information is required in a certificate. This ballot clarifies the requirements and harmonizes the EV Guidelines and Baseline Requirements. The following motion has been proposed by Bruce Morton of Entrust and endorsed by Jeremy Rowley of DigiCert and Robin Alden of Comodo: --Motion Begins-- A. Modify Section 9.2.7 of the EV Guidelines as follows: 9.2.7. Subject Physical Address of Place of Business Field Certificate fields: Number and street: subject:streetAddress (OID: 2.5.4.9) City or town: subject:localityName (OID: 2.5.4.7) State or province (where applicable): subject:stateOrProvinceName (OID: 2.5.4.8) Country: subject:countryName (OID: 2.5.4.6) Postal code: subject:postalCode (OID: 2.5.4.17) Required/Optional: --(City, State, and country – Required; Street and postal code - Optional)--__As stated in Section 7.1.4.2.2 d, e, f, g and h of the Baseline Requirements__ Contents: This field MUST contain the address of the physical location of the Subject’s Place of Business. --Motion Ends-- The procedure for approval of this Final Maintenance Guideline ballot is as follows (exact start and end times may be adjusted to comply with applicable Bylaws and IPR Agreement): BALLOT 191 Status: Final Maintenance Guideline Start time (22:00 UTC) End time (22:00 UTC) Discussion (7 to 14 days) 9 May 2017 16 May 2017 Vote for approval (7 days) 16 May 2017 23 May 2017 If vote approves ballot: Review Period (Chair to send Review Notice) (30 days). If Exclusion Notice(s) filed, ballot approval is rescinded and PAG to be created. If no Exclusion Notices filed, ballot becomes effective at end of Review Period. Upon filing of Review Notice by Chair 30 days after filing of Review Notice by Chair >From Bylaw 2.3: If the Draft Guideline Ballot is proposing a Final Maintenance >Guideline, such ballot will include a redline or comparison showing the set of >changes from the Final Guideline section(s) intended to become a Final >Maintenance Guideline, and need not include a copy of the full set of >guidelines. Such redline or comparison shall be made against the Final >Guideline section(s) as they exist at the time a ballot is proposed, and need >not take into consideration other ballots that may be proposed subsequently, >except as provided in Bylaw Section 2.3(j). Votes must be cast by posting an on-list reply to this thread on the Public list. A vote in favor of the motion must indicate a clear 'yes' in the response. A vote against must indicate a clear 'no' in the response. A vote to abstain must indicate a clear 'abstain' in the response. Unclear responses will not be counted. The latest vote received from any representative of a voting member before the close of the voting period will be counted. Voting members are listed here: <https://cabforum.org/members/> https://cabforum.org/members/ In order for the motion to be adopted, two thirds or more of the votes cast by members in the CA category and greater than 50% of the votes cast by members in the browser category must be in favor. Quorum is shown on CA/Browser Forum wiki. Under Bylaw 2.2(g), at least the required quorum number must participate in the ballot for the ballot to be valid, either by voting in favor, voting against, or abstaining. _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
