The RFC Editor clearly used their own glossary: https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt
A miss at AUTH48, I fear. Regards Brian Carpenter On 20-Oct-21 16:29, Michael Richardson wrote: > > please mark as verified, wait for revision. > > RFC Errata System <[email protected]> wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8995, > > "Bootstrapping Remote Secure Key Infrastructure (BRSKI)". > > > -------------------------------------- > > You may review the report below and at: > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6716 > > > -------------------------------------- > > Type: Technical Reported by: Max Pritikin <[email protected]> > > > Section: 5.8.3 > > > Original Text > > ------------- > > A registrar MAY be configured to ignore (i.e., override the above > > policy) the history of the device, but it is RECOMMENDED that this only > > be configured if hardware-assisted (i.e., Transport Performance Metrics > > (TPM) anchored) Network Endpoint Assessment (NEA) [RFC5209] is > > supported. > > > Corrected Text > > -------------- > > A registrar MAY be configured to ignore (i.e., override the above > > policy) the history of the device, but it is RECOMMENDED that this only > > be configured if hardware-assisted (i.e., Trusted Platform Module (TPM) > > anchored) Network Endpoint Assessment (NEA) [RFC5209] is supported. > > > Notes > > ----- > > The logical expansion of 'TPM' in this parenthetical example is the > > Trusted Platform Module. > > As co-author, I totally agree. > I can't understand why/how that happened. > Did the rfc-editor expand our TLA? > > > > -- > Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) > Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide > > > _______________________________________________ > Anima mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima > _______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
