;> months period to 12, otherwise within a 6 months period there may only be 1
>>>> F2F. Requiring attendance (remote or in-person) if there’s only 1 F2F in
>>>> the time-span, could be hard if there’s a case of bad timing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
; the time-span, could be hard if there’s a case of bad timing.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Additionally, I’d like to request the addition of an additional criteria
>>> (although it’s related to the “publish how it decides to add or remove a CA
>>> certi
to request we add a requirement
>> to:
>>
>>
>>
>>- Publish how a CA can apply for inclusion in its root store
>>
>>
>>
>> With this addition, I’d be happy to endorse
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Martijn
&
Sent:* Thursday, 31 August 2023 00:50
> *To:* CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List <
> servercert-wg@cabforum.org>
> *Subject:* [Servercert-wg] Proposed Revision of SCWG Charter
>
>
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do no
With this addition, I’d be happy to endorse
Regards,
Martijn
From: Servercert-wg On Behalf Of Ben
Wilson via Servercert-wg
Sent: Thursday, 31 August 2023 00:50
To: CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List
Subject: [Servercert-wg] Proposed Revision of SCWG Charter
On Behalf Of Ben
Wilson via Servercert-wg
Sent: Donnerstag, 31. August 2023 00:50
To: CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List
Subject: [Servercert-wg] Proposed Revision of SCWG Charter
All,
Thanks for your suggestions and recommendations. I think we are much closer to
an acceptable
All,
Thanks for your suggestions and recommendations. I think we are much closer
to an acceptable revision of the Server Certificate Working Group Charter.
Here is the current draft:
https://github.com/cabforum/forum/blob/BenWilson-SCWG-charter-1.3/SCWG-charter.md
We have decided that a
