Very good Gerv. It might also be useful to get a show of hands as to who would participate in this WG as it wouldn't make sense to form it if we don't get enough participants. My sense from the last F2F is that we will, but perhaps a poll would give the group a better indication as to who would actually be involved in researching and drafting. Of course, this is not required to form the group. Involvement of Interested Parties with domain expertise would be especially beneficial.
Dean -----Original Message----- From: Public [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gervase Markham via Public Sent: Saturday, June 3, 2017 3:41 PM To: CABFPub <[email protected]> Cc: Gervase Markham <[email protected]> Subject: [cabfpub] Fairly Urgent: Draft Network Security Working Group charter ballot 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://clicktime.symantec.com/a/1/EZ7pThj0JH9y2urm9eBasHkXEPPsEvQtQ10rlw8ntfg=?d=nL94-J7k5HB7xCZFqjMqPR41uxUOcsrOM77TXdz7IS27sYVpwHEm0VnkZaSYl7YC-VLhhwHsz_GZnuuoXc34XruBJgpErY_Pg0toym0FIVdJNHKecsf6a-PUvTikcOOq7WNNDUelWm6rHw9fUnGW0JofoaUqa7cr19RFD8LvKrmVuHbrl-2DM-DZcKNl8oTIAVXHUcMkVt1NNUnPUopLzGvSpaYD7gvn_1XCqWceVUhK2dXINukiirgzD8WbEZe1suu3g2Lww-rA9nZIe_gMtKckuiKKUPl0vGlYfubbVAOGjsyvpXIgDP4zHu9dEUgeIsPdfopl7tFHJoPCgf9Wi8Gzc0FL5grDVjFgP_k5BDdFwm1VXPe17-fyCWF3ek5ySWaeBKjUYDQxHNE6NCl5QkzoPOCUppCv8zZq_RyW9QKw4CAMXWQJ3XbTu15e&u=https%3A%2F%2Fcabforum.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpublic _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
