Thank you for providing the correct comparison, this is helpful.
I'm not sure what kind of precedent we set by voting on a normative
redline that points to something else than what we actually intend to
vote on. However, it seems that more focus is on the EVG which is clearer.
HARICA changes its vote to "yes" for ballot SC65.
Dimitris.
On 8/3/2024 4:36 μ.μ., Inigo Barreira wrote:
All,
The correct comparison URL is
https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/compare/41f01640748fa612386f8b1a3031cd1bff3d4f35..dedeebfe036fa5a6f0d7ae985ea08317ba60b8cb
<https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/compare/41f01640748fa612386f8b1a3031cd1bff3d4f35..dedeebfe036fa5a6f0d7ae985ea08317ba60b8cb>.
I´d like to thank Corey for assisting in this and explaining the
difference between a two dot and a three dot comparison in GitHub.
Regards
*De:*Ponds-White, Trev <trevo...@amazon.com>
*Enviado el:* jueves, 7 de marzo de 2024 20:51
*Para:* Inigo Barreira <inigo.barre...@sectigo.com>; CA/B Forum Server
Certificate WG Public Discussion List <servercert-wg@cabforum.org>;
Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) <dzach...@harica.gr>
*Asunto:* RE: [Servercert-wg] [Voting Period Begins]: SC65: Convert
EVGs into RFC 3647 format v2
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do
not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender
and know the content is safe.
Inigo are you going to fix the redline? I agree with Dimitris that
it’s not actually clear what the change is. For recording purposes I
think we want the ballot content to be correct.
*From:*Servercert-wg <servercert-wg-boun...@cabforum.org> *On Behalf
Of *Inigo Barreira via Servercert-wg
*Sent:* Thursday, March 7, 2024 2:23 AM
*To:* Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) <dzach...@harica.gr>; CA/B Forum
Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List <servercert-wg@cabforum.org>
*Subject:* RE: [EXTERNAL] [Servercert-wg] [Voting Period Begins]:
SC65: Convert EVGs into RFC 3647 format v2
*CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do
not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender
and know the content is safe.
All,
Yes, you´re right Dimitris and I was also a bit confused but I think I
know what has happened.
These changes are over version 2.0.2 as you can check in the PR but
when created the comparing link I was copying the latest ones I was
using since we started the ballot discussion, over last summer, which
at that time the version was 2.0.0, so used this “old” version, then
the 3 dots, and the new version over v2.0.2 every time (you can see
that the changes applied in the last 2 ballots are applied again) but
without changing the initial one, so always took version 2.0.0 for
comparing.
I think this happened because, first I didn´t pay enough attention to
the links, also because it´s been a long time discussing ballot and
finally because there are so many ongoing that I lost track. I´m
really sorry and I apologize.
That said, the problem is just in the comparing link for the BRs (the
EVGs are not affected which is the main objective of this ballot) but
not on the version used for the changes. The changes are over the
latest version published, v2.0.2, as you can check in the PR.
So, with this in mind I don´t know what to do next. According to the
bylaws I can withdraw the ballot during the voting period and prepare
a new version.
OTOH, (considering that the PR is correct) the ballot can continue and
see the result.
Regards
*De:*Servercert-wg <servercert-wg-boun...@cabforum.org> *En nombre de
*Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Servercert-wg
*Enviado el:* jueves, 7 de marzo de 2024 9:07
*Para:* servercert-wg@cabforum.org
*Asunto:* Re: [Servercert-wg] [Voting Period Begins]: SC65: Convert
EVGs into RFC 3647 format v2
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do
not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender
and know the content is safe.
Apologies for not reviewing this ballot sooner.
I am a bit confused with the redline changes, especially in the BRG.
Based on the GitHub link, the comparison of the BRs is against version
2.0.0, not 2.0.2 as described in the summary of this ballot.
HARICA is uncertain about the changes introduced and therefore votes
"no" to ballot SC65.
On 4/3/2024 5:33 μ.μ., Inigo Barreira via Servercert-wg wrote:
*Summary: *
The Extended Validation Certificates guidelines (EVGs) were
developed and written in a specific format. Since then, the RFC
3647 has been the basis (and the de-facto standard) for the
CA/Browser Forum to develop other documents.
This ballot aims to update the EVGs to follow the RFC 3647 format
without changing any content, just moving current sections to
those defined in the RFC 3647. There are no normative requirements
changes.
This change also affects the Baseline Requirements for TSL
certificates (BRs) which needs to point to the new sections of the
EVGs. Both documents will be updated according to the latest
version published.
This ballot is proposed by Iñigo Barreira (Sectigo) and endorsed
by Pedro Fuentes (OISTE) and Ben Wilson (Mozilla).
--- Motion Begins ---
This ballot modifies the “Baseline Requirements for the Issuance
and Management of Publicly-Trusted TLS Certificates" ("TLS
Baseline Requirements"), based on Version 2.0.2 and the
“Guidelines for the Issuance and Management of Extended Validation
Certificates” (EVGs) based on Version 1.8.0.
MODIFY the TLS EVGs and BRs as specified in the following Redline:
Comparing
90a98dc7c1131eaab01af411968aa7330d315b9b...dedeebfe036fa5a6f0d7ae985ea08317ba60b8cb
· cabforum/servercert (github.com)
<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcabforum%2Fservercert%2Fcompare%2F90a98dc7c1131eaab01af411968aa7330d315b9b...dedeebfe036fa5a6f0d7ae985ea08317ba60b8cb&data=05%7C02%7CInigo.Barreira%40sectigo.com%7C22c90a8b04a4446ebed508dc3edffbd6%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C638454378939340788%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=lpQVYFIa2t66ijqB6uEW97TqkoqvWwokeEeAUgGDQb4%3D&reserved=0>
--- Motion Ends ---
This ballot proposes a Final Maintenance Guideline for the BRs and
EVGs. The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows:
Discussion (at least 7 days)
1. Start time: 2024-02-20 17:00:00 UTC
2. End time: not before 2024-03-04 15:00:00 UTC
Vote for approval (7 days)
1. Start time: 2024-03-04 15:30:00 UTC
2. End time: 2024-03-11 15:30:00 UTC
_______________________________________________
Servercert-wg mailing list
Servercert-wg@cabforum.org
https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/servercert-wg
<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.cabforum.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fservercert-wg&data=05%7C02%7CInigo.Barreira%40sectigo.com%7C22c90a8b04a4446ebed508dc3edffbd6%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C638454378939353083%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fcgXtd45lHbyGeaaN%2F3oKKeZf16XSO119jNEpOeA%2Fig%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
Servercert-wg mailing list
Servercert-wg@cabforum.org
https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/servercert-wg
