[cabfpub] [EXT] Re: Revised domain validation ballot

[Ryan Sleevi]

Wayne,

March 1 was the effective date communicated from some root members
forbidding the use of any of the other methods outside of 3.2.2.4 1-10.

Given this already passed effective date, do you believe that it still
needs such an effective date?

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Wayne Thayer via Public <
public at cabforum.org> wrote:

> Jeremy - given that we’re removing 3.2.2.4.11 (“any other method”) with
> this ballot, we should include an effective date.
>
>
>
> *From: *Public <public-bounces at cabforum.org> on behalf of Jeremy Rowley
> via Public <public at cabforum.org>
> *Reply-To: *CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
> *Date: *Wednesday, March 22, 2017 at 10:49 AM
> *To: *Rick Andrews <Rick_Andrews at symantec.com>, CA/Browser Forum Public
> Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi at google.com>
> *Cc: *Jeremy Rowley <jeremy.rowley at digicert.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [cabfpub] [EXT] Re: Revised domain validation ballot
>
>
>
> Yep – thanks. I’ll add that to the list.
>
>
>
> *From:* Rick Andrews [mailto:Rick_Andrews at symantec.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 22, 2017 11:47 AM
> *To:* CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>; Ryan
> Sleevi <sleevi at google.com>
> *Cc:* Jeremy Rowley <jeremy.rowley at digicert.com>
> *Subject:* RE: [EXT] Re: [cabfpub] Revised domain validation ballot
>
>
>
> Jeremy, I thought we were also going to remove the “Required Website
> Content” definition too. Your modified version still contains that term.
> Perhaps you were thinking of removing the definition and then using
> “required website content” in lower case?
>
>
>
> -Rick
>
>
>
> *From:* Public [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org
> <public-bounces at cabforum.org>] *On Behalf Of *Jeremy Rowley via Public
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 22, 2017 7:13 AM
> *To:* Ryan Sleevi <sleevi at google.com>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion
> List <public at cabforum.org>
> *Cc:* Jeremy Rowley <jeremy.rowley at digicert.com>
> *Subject:* [EXT] Re: [cabfpub] Revised domain validation ballot
>
>
>
> PDF version attached.
>
>
>
> *From:* Ryan Sleevi [mailto:sleevi at google.com <sleevi at google.com>]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 22, 2017 8:08 AM
> *To:* CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
> *Cc:* Jeremy Rowley <jeremy.rowley at digicert.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [cabfpub] Revised domain validation ballot
>
>
>
> Jeremy,
>
>
>
> Do you have any version other than a Word document to make available to
> members?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Jeremy Rowley via Public <
> public at cabforum.org> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> Attached is a proposed domain validation ballot that accomplishes three
> things:
>
>
>
> 1.      The ballot adds the domain methods removed by ballot 180-182 back
> into the BRs.
>
> 2.      The ballot removes the “any other method’
>
> 3.      The ballot revises the .well-known method to fix some issues
> identified by the WG
>
> 4.      The ballot fixes an incorrect cross-reference.
>
>
>
> Jeremy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Public mailing list
> Public at cabforum.org
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
> <https://clicktime.symantec.com/a/1/KAtsm7fi1nbGAGHpI7E6fkdUXMNgb2JV0WOoyXLaoS4=?d=YJzCckxcyxX66jNepK-jqRFB48QmLo2rmlXaEZ8f23NoJ8I66XLvOeZMxWcHwm7cLFoW4h5dwZlApPIcRt88cZ1V2GYfnUkbXwzMnq7nXGb18bXkS3Am0u7SGS0YzTufIt9SVKEd2gFAlXmA4MHSxy-jQ4CMGXq3BF6UjXZanTzX3j6fUkIObjlAFFoto9ppkoljcjW_FG46fzuRFeqtu5DSqsB1QIjRG8pK-29cq10rYjlEZAYfwuWz66zgM57OFBXhpI1NfvxyujdD3zJIR9k-QzP84oVPZWNm1_Bm3Qt2Sw3bjBQaUFAn6M18B6IpF1r47vXoJXlcHOdCTDu4Tn2Gw516ZPNY1-KLuIM4XOiN0tMeo9AtEbLR1Rb4z3hZYMUQm0CPXyJY1HvPS0yVNT8y9ns%3D&u=https%3A%2F%2Fcabforum.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpublic>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Public mailing list
> Public at cabforum.org
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170323/c90644ea/attachment-0003.html>