Thank you!

> On Apr 26, 2016, at 8:59 AM, Rich Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Peter, if you are still looking for endorsers, I will endorse this ballot.
> -Rich
> 
> On 4/25/2016 10:34 PM, Peter Bowen wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> Below is a revised ballot based on ballot 167 which failed to get quorum.  I 
>> was unable to get consensus on language around the new RFC reference text 
>> the previous ballot had in section 7, so it has been removed.
>> 
>> As a reminder, the intention here is that all SSL certificates that were 
>> allowed under the BRs are still allowed.  This is a set of corrections and 
>> normative reference updates (such as moving OCSP to RFC 6960 to 
>> affirmatively allow SHA-2 family signatures on responses).  I think that all 
>> the contentious material has been removed and is being held for future 
>> ballots, so I hope that this will move forward.
>> 
>> Do I have at least two endorsers?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Peter
>> 
>> 
>> Ballot 168: Baseline Requirements Corrections (Revised)
>> 
>> The following motion has been proposed by Peter Bowen of Amazon and endorsed 
>> by ___________________:
>> 
>> Background:
>> A number of small corrections and clarifications to the Baseline 
>> Requirements have been identified.  These are, in general, changes that 
>> reflect the existing understanding of the Baseline Requirements by the 
>> Forum.  Due to the understanding that these primarily represent existing 
>> practice, they are combined for efficiency.
>> 
>> -- MOTION BEGINS --
>> Effective the date of passage, the following modifications to the Baseline 
>> Requirements are adopted:
>> In Section 1.6.1:
>> - In the definition of "Applicant Representative", replace "and agrees to 
>> the Certificate Terms of Use" with "the Terms of Use" and append "or is the 
>> CA" at the end of the definition;
>> - In the definition of "Country", replace "sovereign nation" with "Sovereign 
>> State";
>> - In the definition of "Terms of Use", append "or is the CA" at the end of 
>> the definition;
>> In Section 1.6.3:
>> - Delete RFC2560;
>> - Insert "RFC6960, Request for Comments: 6960, X.509 Internet Public Key 
>> Infrastructure Online Certificate Status Protocol - OCSP. Santesson, Myers, 
>> Ankney, Malpani, Galperin, Adams, June 2013.";
>> - Delete X.509v3;
>> - Insert "X.509, Recommendation ITU-T X.509 (10/2012) | ISO/IEC 9594-8:2014 
>> (E), Information technology – Open Systems Interconnection – The Directory: 
>> Public-key and attribute certificate frameworks."
>> Move the content in section 3.3.1 to section 4.2.1 to become the third 
>> paragraph in 4.2.1 and leave section 3.3.1 blank.
>> In section 4.9.9, replace all occurrences of "RFC2560" with "RFC6960".
>> In section 5.2.2, insert "CA" immediately before "Private Key".
>> In section 6.1.2, append "without authorization by the Subscriber" to the 
>> end of the first sentence.
>> In section 6.1.6, update the last citation to read: "[Source: Sections 
>> 5.6.2.3.2 and 5.6.2.3.3, respectively, of NIST SP 56A: Revision 2]"
>> In section 6.2, in the second sentence, insert "CA" immediately before both 
>> instances of "Private Key".
>> In section 6.2.5, append "without authorization by the Subordinate CA" to 
>> the end of the sentence.
>> In sections 7.1.2.1(e) and 7.1.2.2(h) change the organizationName line to 
>> read:
>> "-  organizationName (OID 2.5.4.10): This field MUST be present and the 
>> contents MUST contain either the Subject CA’s name or DBA as verified under 
>> Section 3.2.2.2. The CA may include information in this field that differs 
>> slightly from the verified name, such as common variations or abbreviations, 
>> provided that the CA documents the difference and any abbreviations used are 
>> locally accepted abbreviations; e.g., if the official record shows “Company 
>> Name Incorporated”, the CA MAY use “Company Name Inc.” or “Company Name”.”
>> In section 7.1.2.3(d), replace the text with “The cA field MUST NOT be true."
>> Replace "Subordiate" with "Subordinate" in the title of 7.1.6.3.
>> In section 9.6.1 item 6:
>> - Insert "are the same entity or" immediately prior to "are Affiliated";
>> - Remove "and accepted".
>> In section 9.6.3, replace "agreement to the Terms of Use agreement." with 
>> "acknowledgement of the Terms of Use."
>> In section 9.6.3 item 2, replace "maintain sole control" with "assure 
>> control".
>> In the following sections, replace all occurrences of "Subscriber or Terms 
>> of Use Agreement" with "Subscriber Agreement or Terms of Use".
>> - Section 1.6.1, in the definition of "Subscriber"
>> - Section 4.1.2
>> - Section 4.9.1.1
>> - Section 4.9.11
>> - Section 9.6.1
>> - Section 9.6.3
>> -- MOTION ENDS —
>> 
>> The review period for this ballot shall commence at 2200 UTC on __ April 
>> 2016, and will close at 2200 UTC on __ May 2016. Unless the motion is 
>> withdrawn during the review period, the voting period will start immediately 
>> thereafter and will close at 2200 UTC on __ May 2016. Votes must be cast by 
>> posting an on-list reply to this thread.
>> 
>> A vote in favor of the motion must indicate a clear 'yes' in the response. A 
>> vote against must indicate a clear 'no' in the response. A vote to abstain 
>> must indicate a clear 'abstain' in the response. Unclear responses will not 
>> be counted. The latest vote received from any representative of a voting 
>> member before the close of the voting period will be counted. Voting members 
>> are listed here: https://cabforum.org/members/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Public mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Public mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

Reply via email to