[cabf_validation] Change to EV 9.2.7

[Peter Bowen]

> On Mar 2, 2017, at 6:21 PM, 陳立群 via Validation <validation at cabforum.org> wrote:
> 
> So I don’t know that I have ever posted in Validation Working Group that State is not required in Taiwan about EVGL 9.2.7.  But it seems in your ballot EVGL 9.2.7, you still let State/Province be required. Did your discussion on Jan.,26  let me divide amendment of  SSL BR 7.1.4.2.2 & EVGL 9.2.5 to other two ballots? And you or Bruce propose Ballot No. 191? 

Upon review of the current requirements and the data provided for Taiwan, we did not find any evidence that Taiwan does not have cities, towns, villages or equivalent in its addresses.  To the contrary, all the examples you provided clear have a city, town, village, or similar in the address.  So there is no conflict with the BRs as written today.  

We do need to fix EVG 9.2.5: "And, the jurisdiction for
the applicable Incorporating Agency or Registration Agency at the locality level MUST include the country and
state or province information, where the state or province regulates the registration of the entities at the locality
level, as well as the locality information.”

This should probably say “[…] locality level MUST include the country and MUST include state or province information if the locality is within a state or province."

>      Note that for central government agency or company, the Naming rule of Taiwan GPKI certificate & CRL profile is somewhat different with SSL BR , so we hope Taiwan or other country will be exception.

This is a separate issue.  The CA/Browser Forum has a set of Naming rules.  You are asking that the Forum change the rules to say “either use the CABF’s naming rules or use the naming rules specified by a country standard”.  Ryan Sleevi has suggested that this should be brought as a distinct ballot to the full forum.  I told Kirk that I would write an email to the public list; I’ll do that now.

Thanks,
Peter