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

[Wayne Thayer]

Good point. I don’t have any problem with the ballot being effective immediately because as you point out, we’re already in compliance with it at the request of root programs. I do still believe that this should be clearly stated in this ballot.

In general I think that every ballot should include an effective date rather than relying on the date the ballot is integrated into an updated version of the applicable guidelines (or some other inconsistent interpretation of the rules).


From: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi at google.com>
Date: Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 8:51 AM
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
Cc: Wayne Thayer <wthayer at godaddy.com>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] [EXT] Re: Revised domain validation ballot

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<mailto: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<mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org>> on behalf of Jeremy Rowley via Public <public at cabforum.org<mailto:public at cabforum.org>>
Reply-To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org<mailto:public at cabforum.org>>
Date: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 at 10:49 AM
To: Rick Andrews <Rick_Andrews at symantec.com<mailto:Rick_Andrews at symantec.com>>, CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org<mailto:public at cabforum.org>>, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi at google.com<mailto:sleevi at google.com>>
Cc: Jeremy Rowley <jeremy.rowley at digicert.com<mailto: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<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<mailto:public at cabforum.org>>; Ryan Sleevi <sleevi at google.com<mailto:sleevi at google.com>>
Cc: Jeremy Rowley <jeremy.rowley at digicert.com<mailto: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] On Behalf Of Jeremy Rowley via Public
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 7:13 AM
To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi at google.com<mailto:sleevi at google.com>>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org<mailto:public at cabforum.org>>
Cc: Jeremy Rowley <jeremy.rowley at digicert.com<mailto:jeremy.rowley at digicert.com>>
Subject: [EXT] Re: [cabfpub] Revised domain validation ballot

PDF version attached.

From: Ryan Sleevi [mailto:sleevi at google.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 8:08 AM
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org<mailto:public at cabforum.org>>
Cc: Jeremy Rowley <jeremy.rowley at digicert.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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/f7f2a27b/attachment-0003.html>