Hello David,
Thank you for the comment. Yes, it is certainly good to additionally define the domain registrar in the terminology section. The following has been included:
NEW
domain registrar: An entity in the customer domain, which
facilitates the interaction of a pledge or Registrar-Agent with a
manufacturer service (MASA). It operates as BRSKI-EST server for
the pledge when requesting vouchers and certificates and acts as
the client BRSKI-MASA client when requesting vouchers from the
MASA. This component was introduced in [RFC8995].
I will put an updated version on the ANIMA git. The changes are visible via the diff: https://author-tools.ietf.org/diff?doc_1=draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm&url_2=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/refs/heads/main/draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm.txt
I will wait with a new submission if further comments need to be addressed.
Best regards
Steffen
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Lawrence via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2025 12:21 AM
> To: dnsdir@xxxxxxxx
> Cc: anima@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm.all@xxxxxxxx; last-call@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Dnsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm-19
>
> Document: draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm
> Title: BRSKI with Pledge in Responder Mode (BRSKI-PRM)
> Reviewer: David Lawrence
> Review result: Ready with Nits
>
> I previously reviewed -17 with only two minor issues, one about "Domain Registrar"
> and the other about the IANA instructions.
>
> Thank you for fixing up the IANA instructions.
>
> On the issue of "Domain Registrar" and more broadly on the very frequent usage
> of "domain" itself, I still think it would be useful if the Terminology section called
> out these terms. While "domain" is obviously a general term, many of us will have
> a cognitive bias toward thinking that this is somehow related to the domain names
> in the DNS. This is especially relevant with the term "Domain Registrar", and it was
> initially mental overhead for me on my first read on the document.
>
> I don't think you have to spend a lot of words on the matter, but I still think it would
> be an improvement to have Terminology define "Domain" and "Domain Registrar"
> as they apply to the document. "Domain" is defined in RFC 8995, referenced, but
> "Domain Registrar" is not.
>
> That said, I don't think this is a substantial enough comment to further hold up
> what is otherwise a solid document. But if you're doing to rev a -20 for any other
> reasons ...
>
--
last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
