Hi Inigo, On Mon, 6 Nov 2023, Inigo Barreira wrote:
Not sure what you are requesting, to not consider the issue #423 and remove the version number of the NetSec or that this change can´t be considered a "clean-up" ballot and should go on a different one. Or none of these ?
Both. Let me re-state my original points with all the possible clarity:First, this seems to be a highly significant change relating to something that has rightly been identified as sensitive around the formation of the NetSec WG.
Second, since this is such a highly significant change, if it were to be made, it should not be made in a "Clean-up" Ballot. (For what it is worth, I do not think that this change should be made at all.)
When the #423 was discussed, and Dimitris indicated in the proposal, was to remove the version numbers to avoid pointing to old or deprecated versions because everytime there was a new version of the NetSec, the TLS BRs should change/update and point to the new version. Dimitris indicated in the text that we could leave the version of the NetSec but I think that we agreed during the call to also remove that version number. Maybe someone else can clarify or remember what was agreed. If it was decided to keep the version number for the NetSec, this can be reverted.
I can understand that the significance of this change could easily be missed during a Meeting situation. Luckily we have the opportunity in the Ballot process to address such questions before a Ballot goes to vote.
Tobi
_______________________________________________ Servercert-wg mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/servercert-wg
