Re: [Anima] I-D Action: draft-richardson-anima-registrar-considerations-00.txt

Brian E Carpenter <> Mon, 02 December 2019 23:56 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D512112008F for <>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 15:56:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ck9VMxMym85z for <>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 15:56:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 35A3E120058 for <>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 15:56:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id k13so631383pgh.3 for <>; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 15:56:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ojtGScWuGJ/sw0mcAZOuZCgZOvK3vy9okSCO0nsLkLY=; b=bOMkmMjOhHtsdKfr8c0HphW+XITMJANbbUm3EmKGN/kRFr4BBJ8EcmjR8dAmEgFAXT bQRItqtO2mzo67cmOm+Q+XIN83B4IMf2eL5TyR1eOQFvxu+fIwgnUoZ6L31OEGjAlJf3 o8epxTD0GHJ1y9rQq1hLkLOcxJeNYRrHU5cLEA6d1RCh8jaIhO+R9eDwuNRzbOCaNFS+ DOzLm7XDzMJ4pwqpSMenYWIJbtaGWymi8OmrbvK08uobz2x3kXtlkA3f++31gq/3jqAK ytOSoOXdWVWz+VV96LkS3M+0WTLs5XylRiOexsbTxRB80kj+XvDY2IyZacDxTWc+it7a 0YPw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ojtGScWuGJ/sw0mcAZOuZCgZOvK3vy9okSCO0nsLkLY=; b=WxGuqx5KtMeHd0Pjve37UV1/hWwz3GL0pAcbUocB5oKpSRUS8W8sfgCE/Iv02gERYx JwF8HGcFLgnqz7qNTJ+pECgk0F3uHXOZwGNW0MJBwO/4Ti3bc/sPyyHUheETzp8J5SHB /0btiIaOC+Gjbo432RyoS5hSOpnvNI+MuNKP+zLJ8kv5ZwKUGVwqRzxa111vXknh6Iql K+hM8Drbfufovi7g1pIMNg8vTzxFqvVHka05ZXWe3rJMEt+w6px2IlkdVvp+R+WB4fqu CM9A1EnbY/1GEJwtmnTZoMThx7JAWCfji7YrXOoz5tlOTxraROrxF8Gm6qnDlboGwp8E erhQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX1W2iRCEyo9qFDkpfIWsBEcdHtHGjTfm0tezyagdbecj03sfgw Duo8MsQu8huAjrdzQXwI42mz8tEC
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzVxOq/uUWH3v8rYXDMc1fn0u7hng8WyM7ZsuHgEfY4lpRv6TDybm0bOrSkcpbv10o46zTjsw==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:da47:: with SMTP id l7mr1998915pgj.34.1575330996451; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 15:56:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id t8sm652358pfq.92.2019. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 02 Dec 2019 15:56:35 -0800 (PST)
To: Anima WG <>, Michael Richardson <>
References: <>
From: Brian E Carpenter <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2019 12:56:31 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Anima] I-D Action: draft-richardson-anima-registrar-considerations-00.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2019 23:56:39 -0000


This looks like all good stuff to me and I don't have much to say.

> The domain is embodied by the Registrar component.

I think that's a step too far, because the Registrar doesn't
do anything to establish the domain boundary and which nodes
are at the edges of the domain. So I think it's better to say

"The Registrar component embodies the identity, membership and
trust anchor of the domain."

[The identity being the DomainID, and the membership being the
set of currently enrolled pledges. The registrar is the trust
anchor because it either contains or interfaces with the CA.]

>    This document, while a Best Current Practices, makes use of BCP14
>    language to indicate which practices are mandatory, and which ones
>    are just recommendations.

Did you mean to write "while *not* a BCP"? In any case you've
tagged the draft for the standards track, which seems wrong.


On 03-Dec-19 04:16, wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>         Title           : Operational Considerations for BRSKI Registrar
>         Author          : Michael Richardson
> 	Filename        : draft-richardson-anima-registrar-considerations-00.txt
> 	Pages           : 18
> 	Date            : 2019-12-02
> Abstract:
>    This document describes a number of operational modes that a BRSKI
>    Registration Authority (Registrar) may take on.
>    Each mode is defined, and then each mode is given a relevance within
>    an over applicability of what kind of organization the Registrar is
>    deployed into.  This document does not change any protocol
>    mechanisms.
>    This document includes operational advice about avoiding unwanted
>    consequences.
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> There are also htmlized versions available at:
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> _______________________________________________
> I-D-Announce mailing list
> Internet-Draft directories:
> or