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

Michael Richardson <> Wed, 04 December 2019 15:09 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9A4612081D for <>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 07:09:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9PDPm0Je-MmI for <>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 07:09:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBC2612008C for <>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 07:09:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E22B3818F; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 10:05:46 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BADCE61C; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 10:09:22 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <>
To: Brian E Carpenter <>
cc: Anima WG <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 10:09:22 -0500
Message-ID: <20482.1575472162@localhost>
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: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 15:09:28 -0000

Brian E Carpenter <> wrote:
    > 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."

Thank you.

    > [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.

I meant to mark it as BCP (fixing), or perhaps it would informational.
I'm not really sure if makes sense to publish it in any rush.
Perhaps it belongs in a book or white paper.

Michael Richardson <>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-