Did we actually have a discussion period on this? I saw a pre-ballot but not the opening of a discussion period.
In any case, can someone explain: - How this matches with the X.520 definition of dnQualifier, in particular the second sentence: The DN Qualifier attribute type specifies disambiguating information to add to the relative distinguished name of an entry. It is intended to be used for entries held in multiple DSAs which would otherwise have the same name, and that its value be the same in a given DSA for all entries to which this information has been added. - How this is actually intended to be used in the web PKI? > On Oct 12, 2017, at 11:04 AM, Ben Wilson via Public <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Ballot 208 - dnQualifiers > > This ballot allows CAs to use dnQualifiers in certificates to partition > groups of certificates into different sets and to allow non-identity > information to be included in DV certificates. > > The following motion has been proposed by Peter Bowen of Amazon and endorsed > by Ben Wilson of DigiCert and Ryan Sleevi of Google. > > -- MOTION BEGINS -- > > In the Baseline Requirements, REPLACE the definition of "Subject Identity > Information" with: > > "Information that identifies the Certificate Subject. Subject Identity > Information does not include [strikeout]a domain name listed in the > subjectAltName extension or the Subject commonName field[/strikeout] > [insert]dnQualifier attributes in Distinguished Names, commonName attributes > in Distinguished Names, dNSName Subject Alternative Names, iPAddress Subject > Alternative Names, or SRVName Subject Alternative Names[/insert]." > > In Section 7.1.4.2.2 Subject Distinguished Name Fields, re-letter "j" (Other > Subject Attributes) as letter "k" and INSERT a new subsection j. that reads: > > j. Certificate Field: subject:dnQualifier > > Optional. Contents: This field is intended to be used when several > certificates with the same subject can be partitioned into sets of related > certificates. Each related certificate set MAY have the same dnQualifier. The > CA may include a dnQualifier attribute with a zero length value to explicitly > indicate that the CA makes no assertion about relationship with other > certificates with the same subject. The CA MAY set the dnQualifer value to > the base64 encoding of the SHA1 hash of the subjectAlternativeName extnValue > if it wishes to indicate grouping of certificates by alternative name set. > -- 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 208 Status: Final Maintenance Guideline Start time (22:00 UTC) End > time (22:00 UTC) > > Discussion begins October 12, 2017 22:00 UTC and ends October 19, 2017 22:00 > UTC (7 days) > > Vote for approval begins October 19, 2017 22:00 UTC and ends October 26, 2017 > 22:00 UTC (7 days) > > 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. > > > <pre-ballot-208-dnQualifier.pdf>_______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public > <https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
