IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [stir] current draft charter

Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> Tue, 18 June 2013 15:17 UTC

Return-Path: <rlb@ipv.sx>
X-Original-To: stir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: stir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D16121F9A7C for <stir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:17:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.408
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.408 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.833, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.1, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id toDpENOp2EO2 for <stir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:17:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-x22c.google.com (mail-ob0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BEF521F9A27 for <stir@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:17:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ob0-f172.google.com with SMTP id wo10so4756478obc.17 for <stir@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:17:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=x/upZVe582sILEfe/z0DrpyKLH/7FHDvSDefSYMpDS0=; b=eaR3lGD7V3zrmyJbmckezti088r/bOaYO51GrhrlKC5wg8VBvdS0yq2oJ4gpRyziEU UtoDVuW2dEaB1Ey/Nyg6f93pJvXKB8ZVrpj3ihUNC832EHZpqPj2HYYJATbjCHtGG99s GnNiMSpx64oE7a4qVhKRgokunFo+VpMa45Be9jD5TrGhx7KhxAtJBS7av7srokN8AMhW M1I3E3a1rqMiCzvAuU53S5HLDM3sQwIRcpSqxkDN5Vk9hPf87XFTuu6GbhVHJW/mf7uA mUngMWlXs/1zP/tE6GIQ0EyP2JCyaPZyG9nrrhadcjVYbHW1W2312YFMrafpDycl/FK4 5FQA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.60.2 with SMTP id d2mr12244246obr.75.1371568642012; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:17:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.26.135 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:17:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [128.33.85.80]
In-Reply-To: <51C078F1.4020508@dcrocker.net>
References: <CDE47FBA.21982%jon.peterson@neustar.biz> <275EE7EE-E92C-454A-BD5C-C04BE171AA14@cs.columbia.edu> <4647_1371560112_51C058B0_4647_190_1_B5939C6860701C49AA39C5DA5189448B0A37D8@PEXCVZYM12.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <010701ce6c35$672f6970$358e3c50$@shockey.us> <51C078F1.4020508@dcrocker.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:17:21 -0400
Message-ID: <CAL02cgRo4iTB59Ux+QLbV83ook9Mg=CQ6RDSYDHGsxjPf6HrTA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e015387dcb1537904df6f3561"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnuVqgFD9w4q2zFoE7gDz2UduQCKeF85oYL7k87DE7j+EZcCQcsOlTSP04cp2rgnzGuKsKO
Cc: "philippe.fouquart@orange.com" <philippe.fouquart@orange.com>, Henning Schulzrinne <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>, "Peterson, Jon" <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>, "stir@ietf.org" <stir@ietf.org>, Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us>
Subject: Re: [stir] current draft charter
X-BeenThere: stir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited <stir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/stir>, <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/stir>
List-Post: <mailto:stir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir>, <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:17:26 -0000

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote:

> On 6/18/2013 8:06 AM, Richard Shockey wrote:
>
>> Although people sometimes like using ownership as a shortcut, it's more
>> of a
>> right of use really. (I'm sure some here will remember discussions on the
>> notion of carrier of record with eye-watering nostalgia)
>>
>
>
> As someone who's been using the term ownership here, I'll note that I
> indeed meant it as an expedient and am happy to use whatever term is
> already common or that the group prefers.  The 'right to use' is the
> important issue here, not the legality of ownership.
>
> Absent there being an established term, how about assignment and assignee,
> in place of ownership and owner?


That would be consistent with usage in the Internet number / RPKI space.
 The verb "to hold" is also used, e.g., the holder of number resources.

--Richard



>
>
> d/
> --
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net
> ______________________________**_________________
> stir mailing list
> stir@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/stir<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email