Gerv, Thanks for posting this. As you note, haven’t gotten internal consensus to endorse/propose this language, so it will need a proposer.
Thanks, Peter > On Jun 3, 2017, at 12:41 PM, Gervase Markham via Public <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Peter was planning to post this for discussion, but ran into some > headwinds, so I am. If we want to have this group formed so it can meet > in Berlin, which I think would be a very good thing to get it going, we > need to launch the ballot by 10pm UTC on Monday (2 weeks before we meet). > > So can I have _quick_ feedback on whether this does the job or not, and > concrete suggestions for change if not, and a couple of people willing > to endorse? I need two people. > > Thanks :-) > > Gerv > > <cut here> > > Ballot XXX - Formation of Network Security Working Group > > The following motion has been proposed by Peter Bowen of Amazon and > endorsed by XXX of XXX and XXX of XXX: > > -- MOTION BEGINS -- > > In accordance with Section 5.3 of the CA/B Forum Bylaws, the chartering > of a new Working Group requires a ballot. This ballot charters the > Network Security Working Group. > > The CAB Forum's Network Security Guidelines were adopted in August 2012 > but have not been updated since. Significant doubts have been raised as > to their fitness for purpose in 2017. Therefore, the Working Group’s > charter will be as follows: > > Scope > ----- > > 1. Consider options for revising, replacing or scrapping the Network > Security Guidelines. > > Deliverables > ------------ > > 1. An extensive report with one or more proposals for the future of the > Network Security Guidelines. > > 2. For proposals involvement replacement, details of the availability > and applicability of the proposed alternative basis, and what > modifications if any would be needed to it in order to make it suitable > for use. > > 3. For proposals involving revision, details of the revisions that are > deemed necessary and how the document will be kept current in the future. > > 4. For proposals involving scrapping, an explanation of why this is > preferable to either of the other two options. > > 5. If there are multiple proposals, optionally a recommendation as to > which one to pursue and an associated timeline. > > 6. A form of ballot or ballots to implement any recommendations. > > Expiry > ------ > > The Working Group shall expire once the deliverables have been > completed, or if the group agrees that it cannot achieve the 2/3rds > endorsement required by the bylaws for any proposal. > > -- MOTION ENDS -- > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > [email protected] > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
