draft-ietf-pkix-x509-ipaddr-as-extn-00.txt

["Sanjaya" <sanjaya@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi all,
I'd like to make 2 comments on this draft:

1. The term 'ownership of address space' is not used in RIR community.
    It implies that the address space is permanently given to somebody,
while
    in fact it is only temporarily allocated/assigned while the user still
has
    a relation with the registry (contract with an ISP or a membership with
RIR).
    Could we replace it with 'delegated to', 'allocated to', or 'assigned
to'?
    Also 'stewardship' is probably better than 'ownership' (it implies
responsibility
    as well).

2. The use of attribute certificate (AC) for this purpose is also
appropriate.
    We can just add an attribute certificate whenever a new allocation is
    made, rather than revoking the PKC and create a new one with
    the new allocation added in the extension.
    However, for practical purpose (speed of authentication and authori-
    sation, for example), it make sense to attach the extension in an PKC.
    With this consideration, I propose that we add a profile of an AC as
part
    of this draft to ensure consistency in both approach, and to allow
flexibility
    in the implementation.

Cheers,
Sanjaya
Project Manager
APNIC