Re: [cabfpub] Voting has started on Ballot 214 - CAA Discovery CNAME Errata

2017-09-22 Thread Stephen Davidson via Public
QuoVadis also does not believe a transition period is necessary for the reasons described by Jacob. Delaying the erratum that we all seem to accept simply adds friction to the introduction of CAA. Regards, Stephen From: Public [public-boun...@cabforum.org] on

Re: [cabfpub] Voting has started on Ballot 214 - CAA Discovery CNAME Errata

2017-09-22 Thread Jacob Hoffman-Andrews via Public
I believe a transition period is not necessary, because it's entirely possible to operate the RFC 6844 algorithm and the RFC 6844 + erratum 5065 algorithm in tandem, without significantly impacting issuance. The lookups done under erratum 5065 are a strict subset of those done under RFC 6844, so

Re: [cabfpub] Voting has started on Ballot 214 - CAA Discovery CNAME Errata

2017-09-22 Thread Doug Beattie via Public
In light of recent discussions about a phase in period, GlobalSign changes their vote to NO for Ballot 214. From: Doug Beattie Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2017 7:34 AM To: 'CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List' Subject: RE: [cabfpub] Voting has started on Ballot 214 -