[cabf_validation] Proposed ballot on improving Registration Number language in EVGs

[Tim Hollebeek]

This is a requirement, and any requirements around how dates should be formatted need to be stated as such in the appropriate profile section. It MUST NOT be stated in the definition.

 

-Tim

 

From: Validation <validation-bounces at cabforum.org> On Behalf Of Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Validation
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2024 2:26 AM
To: CABforum3 <validation at cabforum.org>
Subject: Re: [cabf_validation] Proposed ballot on improving Registration Number language in EVGs

 

 

On 16/8/2024 2:53 π.μ., Clint Wilson via Validation wrote:

Hi Corey, 

 

Overall this seems like a good improvement to clarity of the current expectations related to these sections of the EVGs, reflecting the predominant approach to populating the subject:serialNumber field for EV TLS certificates. I do think it would be valuable to standardize on a date format (admittedly somewhat because it feels like a missed opportunity to not do so). What about something like modifying the newly added definition:

 

**Date of Formation**: The date on which a Legal Entity is first recognized by the jurisdiction in which it was created or formed. The date is formatted according to the complete representation of an extended format calendar date in ISO 8601 (i.e. YYYY-MM-DD; e.g. 0001-01-01).


Hi Clint,

I'm in favor of examples where they help avoid unintended mistakes, so I would support adding something like "e.g. 2000-12-31" to make it abundantly clear where the month and day is supposed to be represented.


Thanks,
Dimitris.




 

The parenthetical is probably too much, but you get the idea. And then the three instances of "in any one of the common date formats” could just be deleted.

 

Cheers,

-Clint





On Aug 9, 2024, at 8:55 AM, Corey Bonnell via Validation  <mailto:validation at cabforum.org> <validation at cabforum.org> wrote:

 

Hello,

Some time ago, I presented [1] a ballot proposal on improving the requirements for the Registration Number value in the EVGs. Here is the current proposal:  <https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/compare/main...CBonnell:servercert:govt-entity-serial-number> https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/compare/main...CBonnell:servercert:govt-entity-serial-number.

 

On the call where the proposal was presented, there was a desire to explore standardizing date formats for the Date of Formation. Is this something that we would like to see added to the ballot? For the sake of minimizing scope of the ballot, I’m in favor of moving forward without such a requirement, but will certainly be happy to incorporate if there are strong feelings that such a requirement should be added in this ballot.

 

Thanks,

Corey

 

[1]  <https://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/validation/2024-July/001997.html> https://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/validation/2024-July/001997.html

_______________________________________________
Validation mailing list
 <mailto:Validation at cabforum.org> Validation at cabforum.org
 <https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/validation> https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/validation

 





_______________________________________________
Validation mailing list
Validation at cabforum.org <mailto:Validation at cabforum.org> 
https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/validation

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/validation/attachments/20240826/b0e4dbfb/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5231 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/validation/attachments/20240826/b0e4dbfb/attachment-0001.p7s>