I'm not sure it matters that B is in the same trust domain as A, wrt the
audit log.
Maybe you meant to say:

    Pledge P registers at a specific registrar B.

    B examines the audit log and determines that P was previously registered
    at another registrar A.

    Now B can see that there is an A in the audit log.

    If A belongs to the same trust domain as B, then B would likely
    happily re-register P.




Toerless Eckert <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Pledge P registers at a specific registrar B. B examines the audit log and
    > determines that P was previously registered at another registrar A. Now
    > B can see from theidentity of A in the audit log if A belongs to the
    > same trust domain as B. If yes, then B would likely happily re-register
    > P. Use-case: A failed and was replaced by B, or multiple registrars in
    > the trust domain. Alternative, A is not known to be in the same trust
    > domain by B, so B would refuse to register P, probably raise an
    > exception to operations. In this case, i could come up with a range of
    > use case examples what operations would do next.

    > Does this help ?

    > Cheers
    > Toerless

    > P.S.: Experimenting if the old alias for the co-authors still work. I
    > think IETF tools keep it alife for a few years.

    > On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 02:21:57PM -0500, M. Ranganathan wrote:
    >> Clarification on question below:
    >>
    >> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 11:22 AM M. Ranganathan <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >> > Hello,
    >> >
    >> > I am reading the voucher artifact RFC 8366. I am confused about how the
    >> > "audit voucher" (page 6) is supposed to be used. Specifically, the text
    >> > says  " The registrar mitigates a MiTM registrar by auditing that an
    >> > unknown MiTM registrar does not appear in the log entries. " How can 
it do
    >> > this? Any concrete example that clarifies this use case would help me
    >> > understand.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> What is confusing me is the interpretation of the term "Man In The 
Middle"
    >> (MiTM). Am I correct in assuming that this refers to previous registrars
    >> where the device may have successfully registered?
    >>
    >>
    >> > I am not sure if this is the correct mailing list for this question.
    >> > Thanks in advance for your help.
    >> >
    >> > Regards,
    >> >
    >> > Ranga
    >> >
    >> > --
    >> > M. Ranganathan
    >> >
    >> >
    >>
    >> --
    >> M. Ranganathan

    >> _______________________________________________
    >> Anima mailing list
    >> [email protected]
    >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

    > _______________________________________________
    > Anima mailing list
    > [email protected]
    > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

Reply via email to