All the rooms booked for the meeting in Herndon have full video conference capabilities. They are set up to natively use Amazon Chime, which works on macOS, iOS, Windows, and Android, has audio-only dial-in numbers for many countries, and has web based screen sharing.
> On Feb 5, 2018, at 1:04 PM, Virginia Fournier via Public > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Please let me know when the Governance WG meeting will be at the F2F and > provide a dial-in number. Thanks. > > > Best regards, > > Virginia Fournier > Senior Standards Counsel > Apple Inc. > ☏ 669-227-9595 > ✉︎ [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Public Digest, Vol 70, Issue 11 > Date: February 3, 2018 at 5:28:56 AM PST > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Reply-To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > Send Public mailing list submissions to > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Public digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Attendance of Interested Parties at Working Group > meetings (Ryan Sleevi) > 2. Re: Attendance of Interested Parties at Working Group > meetings (Dean Coclin) > 3. Re: Attendance of Interested Parties at Working Group > meetings (Gervase Markham) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2018 21:00:59 -0500 > From: Ryan Sleevi <[email protected]> > To: Kirk Hall <[email protected]>, "CA/Browser Forum > Public Discussion List" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Attendance of Interested Parties at Working > Group meetings > Message-ID: > <CACvaWvaCyDY=5d+fiyt94yqw-gpxrvnwidqtujxaiog_cnc...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 8:49 PM, Kirk Hall via Public <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I previously agreed with Wayne that an all-day VWG meeting in Herndon, VA >> on Tuesday, March 6 is a good idea ? but we will have to push other WG >> meetings to later, maybe Wednesday morning. *Does anyone object to this >> plan?* >> >> >> >> On the question of attendance (in person or by phone) by Interested >> Parties at the special VWG meeting ? I have pasted in the relevant part of >> Bylaw 3.2 below. If you had asked me what I thought it meant, I would have >> said ?IPs can only come to the full Forum meetings at the invitation of the >> Chair, but they can come to Working Group meetings (teleconferences and >> face-to-face meetings) without an invitation from the Chair ? it?s at their >> option.? >> > > Bylaws 4.2 (Finances) > Bylaws 5.1(a) > Bylaws 5.4 > > >> Or would it be better if we permanently adopt my interpretation above ? >> that no invitation from the Chair is needed for Interested Parties to >> attend WG meetings at their own option? >> > > I don't believe that interpretation is consistent with those remarks. Using > your interpretation, it would mean that WG meetings are distinct from Forum > meetings, therefore Amazon is hosting (separately) the meeting of the Forum > and the meeting of individual WGs. > > This applies to both physical meetings, such as the upcoming F2F, and to > teleconferences. Similarly, I'm surprise you would advocate for such an > interpretation, given your previously expressed concerns with respects to > the IP Policy, and given the issues around reliably providing minutes for > WG meetings to the Public List (as required under 5.2(a) and supported by > the definitions on Page 13 as being unambiguously [email protected] ) > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180202/65d02de7/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2018 03:38:29 +0000 > From: Dean Coclin <[email protected]> > To: Kirk Hall <[email protected]>, "CA/Browser Forum > Public Discussion List" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Attendance of Interested Parties at Working > Group meetings > Message-ID: > > <bl2pr14mb0899fe38e514f65da301528c92...@bl2pr14mb0899.namprd14.prod.outlook.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > The original intent of the bylaws stating that people other than members > needed a chair invitation to attend F2F meetings was, as you state, to insure > the meeting size didn't get out of control lest we need an auditorium for the > meetings. The WG meetings are a part of the F2F. I think it's clear that > anyone other than a member cannot attend w/o an invitation. Having said that, > according to the wiki, we are at 34 signed up for the meeting, hence there is > capacity for additional people (assuming there isn't a rush of sign ups the > last week). I would encourage members that are attending to insure they are > on the wiki list by next week. > > Regarding the all day validation group meeting, I think that is fine, given > that they have some critical items to discuss. Would it be possible to also > hold the Governance meeting the same day? I don't think many of the > Governance people are in the Validation group and hence we can be more > efficient by doing those two on Tuesday. You could then do a policy and net > sec working group on Weds. Just a suggestion. > > Dean > > From: Public [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kirk Hall via > Public > Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 8:50 PM > To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected]> > Subject: [cabfpub] Attendance of Interested Parties at Working Group meetings > > I previously agreed with Wayne that an all-day VWG meeting in Herndon, VA on > Tuesday, March 6 is a good idea - but we will have to push other WG meetings > to later, maybe Wednesday morning. Does anyone object to this plan? > > On the question of attendance (in person or by phone) by Interested Parties > at the special VWG meeting - I have pasted in the relevant part of Bylaw 3.2 > below. If you had asked me what I thought it meant, I would have said "IPs > can only come to the full Forum meetings at the invitation of the Chair, but > they can come to Working Group meetings (teleconferences and face-to-face > meetings) without an invitation from the Chair - it's at their option." > > That's what I thought sub (a) meant by "becoming involved" in Working Groups, > whereas I believed sub (c) only applies to participation in "Forum > Teleconferences and Forum Meetings" - which I thought meant the meetings of > the full Forum itself. As I recall, we didn't want the full Forum meetings > to grow to 100 people or more, perhaps with many more Interested Parties in > attendance than CAs and browsers - that seemed unmanageable from a logistics > standpoint. Hence the need for a little gatekeeping and specific invitations. > > Here is the language from the Bylaws: > > Interested Parties may participate in Forum activities in the following ways: > > (a) By becoming involved in Working Groups, > > (b) By posting to the Public Mail List, and > > (c) By participating in those portions of Forum Teleconferences and Forum > Meetings to > which they are invited by the Forum Chair relating to their areas of special > expertise or > the subject of their Working Group participation. > > In any case, I will happily "invite" any Interested Party who wants to be > involved in the VWG meeting on March 6, if necessary. > > Or would it be better if we permanently adopt my interpretation above - that > no invitation from the Chair is needed for Interested Parties to attend WG > meetings at their own option? > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180203/8b3c3d30/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2018 14:28:51 +0100 > From: Gervase Markham <[email protected]> > To: Kirk Hall <[email protected]>, CA/Browser Forum Public > Discussion List <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Attendance of Interested Parties at Working > Group meetings > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > On 03/02/18 02:49, Kirk Hall via Public wrote: >> I previously agreed with Wayne that an all-day VWG meeting in Herndon, >> VA on Tuesday, March 6 is a good idea ? but we will have to push other >> WG meetings to later, maybe Wednesday morning.? *_Does anyone object to >> this plan?_* > > Not at all. In the last meeting, we had spare time at the end of the > second day anyway. > >> On the question of attendance (in person or by phone) by Interested >> Parties at the special VWG meeting ? I have pasted in the relevant part >> of Bylaw 3.2 below.? If you had asked me what I thought it meant, I >> would have said ?IPs can only come to the full Forum meetings at the >> invitation of the Chair, but they can come to Working Group meetings >> (teleconferences and face-to-face meetings) without an invitation from >> the Chair ? it?s at their option.? > > I would read this as the variant expressed by others - "Forum Meetings" > includes all aspects of the meeting (because any part could become > overcrowded), and so clause c) trumps clause a) for WG meetings during > Forum Meetings, and so you need to explicitly invite people. But I hope > that task will not be too onerous :-) > > Gerv > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > [email protected] > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public > > > ------------------------------ > > End of Public Digest, Vol 70, Issue 11 > ************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > [email protected] > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
