Subject: [Rats] Nine Event Definitions

From: "Eric Voit (evoit)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 15:13:42 +0000

In today's RATS WG call, there was a discussion on RATS timing definitions
across use cases.  Below are nine Event definitions which span multiple RATS
use cases.  Each of these nine Event definitions currently appear in a pull
request to the Architecture document.   (For those of you following the
alias, you will have seen early versions of these definitions.)    It is
hoped that by including a common set of event type definitions in the
Architecture document, we will have a language which can help us more
formally frame similar characteristics between the use cases.  And then we
can build call flow / timing diagrams which hopefully expose these
similarities.

There are two asks from this email:
(1) Do you want to propose one or more *additional* event types which you
believe are common enough to be placed into the architecture document?
(Note: that *not* having an Event type in the architecture document does not
preclude you developing your own Event types.  It just makes it harder for
others to adopt your event definitions within their documents.)

(2) Are there any issues with the names and definitions described below?

------------------------------
Nine Event Definitions
------------------------------

vg - Value Generation
A value to appear in a claim was created

ns - Nonce Sent
A random number is generated and sent

nr - Nonce Relayed
A random number is passed through another entity

eg - Evidence Generation
An Attester collects claims and generates Evidence

er - Evidence Relayed
A Relying Party relays Evidence to a Verifier

rg - Result Generation
A Verifier appraises Evidence and generates an Attestation Result

ra - Result Appraised
The Relying Party appraises Attestation Results

op - Operation Performed
The Relying Party performs some operation in part driven by the current
trustworthiness of the Attester 

rx - Result eXpiry
An Attestation Result should no longer be accepted, according to the
Verifier that generated them.

Thanks!
Eric