[cabfpub] Allowing SHA-1 OCSP and CRL signatures past 2016

[Ryan Sleevi]

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>
wrote:

> I think we may be making too much of all this.  If we have both an old
> style ballot to make the change now following the procedures in our Bylaws
> and our past practices, at the very least we will have added the change to
> our Draft Guidelines with everything else.
>
>
>
> If we simultaneously add the change to Ballot 180, we will also be
> following the procedures in our IPR Policy and our new practices, and
> Ballot 180, once adopted on Jan. 7 will effectively override the previous
> old style ballot.  We would move faster if we could on Ballot 180 to avoid
> having to follow this process, but it’s not possible.
>

Can you explain what you mean by "simultaneously"? I tried to highlight the
issue with your proposal before, but perhaps it would be better if you
restate.

We can do several things, but as I see it, your suggestion of
"simultaneous" is to vote on 184 while also modifying 180. This implies
that the results of 184 are irrelevant for the modification of 180, which
seems a dangerous precedent to set, and otherwise pointless to vote on 184.

If you mean that 180 follows the completion of 184, then it means
withdrawing 180, as I explained previously. That's fine, it just means
delaying it.


> So it’s  win-win, and I see no harm from following a dual track for this
> single time-sensitive issue.  Remember also that the purpose of our IPR
> Policy is to detect whether or not there are potential IP claims relating
> to a draft guideline – in this case, I don’t see how Wayne’s proposed
> amendment could possibly impact anyone’s claimed IP.
>

I appreciate your perspective, but I don't believe your perspective
provides the legal assurances that members want, and for which our IPR
policy is designed to assure. That's the point - we shouldn't be
speculating about IP impact, we should follow a consistent process.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20161026/2f9cc49e/attachment-0003.html>