[Rats] use case document updates on Roots of Trust

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

We seem to have regular email disputes on terms like Roots of Trust. 
I continue to have difficulty with the term. Particularly in the plural
"Roots" form.
As I process edits to the use case document, I got a bunch of text:

   The TCG Glossary also offers a general definition for Root of Trust “A
   component that performs one or more security-specific functions, such as
   measurement, storage, reporting, verification, and/or update. It is trusted
   always to behave in the expected manner, because its misbehavior cannot be
   detected (such as by measurement) under normal operation. “ 

{I personally find it very difficult to understand the words as other than an
alias for Trust Anchor, yet it clearly is something else.  It's hard to make
my neurons pull up a different meaning.  This is probably something that
every RATS document should say clearly upon first using the term, in order to
ease the impedence mis-match with IETF readers as we get reviews} 

I have included not just Ned Smith's comments about the term Roots of Trust,
but his survey of the various origins of the term.  I'm sure that this
belongs somewhere else.

That diff is here:
  https://ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-richardson-rats-usecases-04&url2=https://ietf-rats-wg.github.io/ietf-rats-usecases/draft-richardson-rats-usecases.txt

and commit is:
  https://github.com/ietf-rats-wg/ietf-rats-usecases/commit/7386e8c0df11ece66e3c95f85d141a639d440e12


-- 
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-