[cabf_validation] Question before we start Ballot 169

[Kirk Hall]

I'm good with that on DNS definition.

Who wants to post the ballot and put in the start-stop dates?

From: Ben Wilson [mailto:ben.wilson at digicert.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 11:42 AM
To: Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrust.com>; validation (validation at cabforum.org) <validation at cabforum.org>
Subject: RE: Question before we start Ballot 169

It was originally Jeremy with endorsers of Doug Beattie and Tim Hollebeek.  If they are still willing.  On the question about the definition of "Domain Name System", maybe we just leave it as is without a BR definition.

From: validation-bounces at cabforum.org<mailto:validation-bounces at cabforum.org> [mailto:validation-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Kirk Hall
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 12:38 PM
To: validation (validation at cabforum.org<mailto:validation at cabforum.org>) <validation at cabforum.org<mailto:validation at cabforum.org>>
Subject: [cabf_validation] Question before we start Ballot 169

On the call today, there were no objections to starting Ballot 169, so I guess we can.

Ben - the most recent Ballot 169 draft doesn't list the proposer and endorsers.  Do you remember who that was?

Question:  I just noticed that the Ballot (and existing BR 3.2.2.4) uses the term Domain Name System about six times total, but it is not included in our Definitions.  (I see we list DNS as an acronym for Domain Name System, and it's pretty well defined outside of the BRs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_Name_System )

Do we care?  Or just go with the Ballot as written now?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://cabforum.org/pipermail/validation/attachments/20160721/d28a3fc0/attachment-0001.html