Re: [Drip] Potential name change for draft-ietf-drip-rid

["Card, Stu" <[e-mail]>]

I concur. Thanks Bob!


On Fri, Aug 6, 2021, 14:23 Robert Moskowitz <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Thus look for the new draft title as:
>
> DRIP Entity Tag (DET) for Unmanned Aircraft System Remote Identification
> (UAS RID)
>
> with the title abbreviation of:
>
> DRIP Entity Tag (DET)
>
> But at this point I am not changing the draft name.
>
> On 8/3/21 5:10 PM, Card, Stu wrote:
>
> Correction:
> DRIP Identity Tag (DIT)
> or
> DRIP Entity Tag (DET)
>
> Intriguing that "entity" is embedded in "identity"... checking etymology
> now...
>
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021, 17:05 Card, Stu <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> DRIP Entity Tag (DIT)?
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021, 4:57 PM Robert Moskowitz <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Other than I don't think I was the one that came up with "RID"....
>>>
>>> an acronym is valuable.  It does not need to be a TLA, an FLA will
>>> work.  ;)
>>>
>>> Also important to be pronounceable.  I really struggled with some IBM
>>> used back in the big iron days!
>>>
>>> Also we are proposing the DRIP Entity ID to be used in many places in
>>> the UAS/USS architecture.  One name to bind them all?
>>>
>>> Unmanned Aviation Entity ID  UAEID   Too many vowels.  Plus "UAE" is a
>>> nation.  hmm more daydreaming needed.
>>>
>>> Also "Aviation" for inclusiveness and "Aircraft" provide the same first
>>> letter to the acronym with potential acronym expansion errors.
>>>
>>> I have not looked at all uses of "RID" in drip-req, but at least the
>>> first few follow your point.  drip-arch will have to be checked as well.
>>>
>>> But your point is a good one and I will see what I can come up with.
>>>
>>> On 8/3/21 4:21 PM, Card, Stu wrote:
>>>
>>> Please don't use the acronym "RID" to refer to the identity or the
>>> identifier. The regulators & other SDOs use it to refer to "remote
>>> identification" [and tracking] as a _process_. ASTM F3411 refers to the
>>> identifier of interest as the "UAS ID" although that is also a misnomer as
>>> it uniquely identifies not the whole UAS but only the UA itself. Can't we
>>> just call our specific subtype the "DRIP Entity ID" as in the F3411
>>> revision, or "DRIP [entity] identifier" as in our own IETF DRIP
>>> requirements draft?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021, 3:30 PM Robert Moskowitz <[e-mail]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> During our IETF111 session we covered changing what is in
>>>> draft-ietf-drip-rid.
>>>>
>>>> Over the past few versions, drip-rid absorbed other drafts and perhaps
>>>> it is time to shed a few things.
>>>>
>>>> Sec 6 on DRIP Proofs is really for draft-ietf-drip-auth and will be
>>>> replaced with pointers to that draft.
>>>>
>>>> In a couple places there is the HHIT registry discuss.  Noteably sec
>>>> 4.5.  this should point to draft-wiethuechter-drip-registries, which
>>>> should be adopted by the wg.
>>>>
>>>> drip-rid should be focused on the Remote ID itself.  In fact in the
>>>> revision to ASTM F3411, we got in that Session ID type 1 is:
>>>>
>>>> Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Drone Remote Identification
>>>> Protocol (DRIP) entity ID.
>>>>
>>>> So I propose to change the title in the draft to:
>>>>
>>>> Unmanned Aircraft System Remote Entity ID (UAS RID)
>>>>
>>>> And not change the draft name.
>>>>
>>>> Comments?  I don't see any changes need in the Abstract for this.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Tm-rid mailing list
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tm-rid
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Robert Moskowitz
>>> Owner
>>> HTT Consulting
>>> C:      248-219-2059
>>> F:      248-968-2824
>>> E:      [e-mail]
>>>
>>> There's no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter who
>>> gets the credit
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Robert Moskowitz
> Owner
> HTT Consulting
> C:      248-219-2059
> F:      248-968-2824
> E:      [e-mail]
>
> There's no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter who gets
> the credit
>