[Anima] Re: title change for RFC8366bis / term 'imprinting'

[Esko Dijk <[e-mail]>]

We have used the term 'imprint' / imprinting for the equivalent of a 
birth certificate in ANIMA, but only since v11 of 8366bis.

See: 
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-anima-rfc8366bis-10&url2=draft-ietf-anima-rfc8366bis-11&difftype=--html

Before that, and in RFC 8366 also, it was used for the process of 
onboarding and in some way "imprinting" the trusted operational network 
(CA or Registrar or other) into the new device.

Also in the original paper of the resurrecting duckling, I believe, 
imprinting is related to trusting the new operational network at first 
sight, with 'resurrecting' implying that it could occur multiple times. 
E.g. after a hard-reset operation. So the imprinting could happen 
multiple times, while the birth certificate provisioning in the factory 
occurs only once.

So in this context, it's better we remove our re-defined term 
"imprinting" from the draft to avoid further confusion. (Which we now 
already did in -35)

Esko


On 8/17/26 09:30, Fries, Steffen wrote:
> Hi Michael, Esko
>
> Just a short observation regarding the definition of "imprint" in draft-irtf-t2trg-security-setup-iot-devices. From the discussion we had in ANIMA in the context of bootstrapping (BRSKI and variants) I understood the term always equivalent to a birth certificate. This typically happens during manufacturing by providing the IDevID. This typically happens just once, while bootstrapping to my understanding was always related to obtaining the security credentials from the target operational domain (trust handover and LDevID(s)).
> But we can sort that out later, once RFC8366bis is finished.
>
> Best regards
> Steffen
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael Richardson<[e-mail]>
>> Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2026 11:03 PM
>> To: Esko Dijk<[e-mail]>
>> Cc:[e-mail]
>> Subject: [Anima] Re: title change for RFC8366bis / term 'imprinting'
>>
>>
>> Esko Dijk<[e-mail]> wrote:
>>      > For me ok to replace 'imprinting' with 'provisioning', but if we use the word
>>      > 'provisioning' in the Terminology section anywhere, it would be helpful to
>>      > still define 'provisioning' also there. That word is currently not used
>>      > anywhere in the latest text (Github main) as far as I can tell.
>>
>> It was a goal of Mohit's draft-irtf-t2trg-security-setup-iot-devices-07
>> to explain all these terms...
>>
>> We used the word "provisioned" once in section 8, as a verb, relating to SZTP, but
>> I think it went away already, and I was just now looking at the wrong branch on
>> laptop.
>>
>> One more use of "imprint" in ietf-voucher-request.yang, changed to onboarding.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Richardson<[e-mail]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
>>             Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
>>
>> **       My working hours and your working hours may be different.         **
>> ** Please do not feel obligated to reply outside your normal working hours **
>>
>>
>>
-- 
*IoTconsultancy.nl* | Email/Teams: [e-mail] | +31 6 
2385 8339