To be clear, I wasn’t suggesting a delay, rather, something that would be done in parallel. But your call, either way is fine with me.
-----Original Message----- From: Gervase Markham [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, June 3, 2017 5:12 PM To: Dean Coclin <[email protected]>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Fairly Urgent: Draft Network Security Working Group charter ballot On 03/06/17 21:59, Dean Coclin wrote: > 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. I think we should pass the ballot, form the group, and if it turns out no-one wants to join it I'll join, elect myself as chair, and close it down again. Let's not delay this with more straw polling. The best way this group can get off to a good start is having a face-to-face meeting in Berlin, and for that to happen, the ballot needs to start the process on Monday. Gerv _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
