Monitor function description problem

[kent@…]

The introduction states “Those who are concerned about misissue [sic] can monitor the logs, asking them regularly for all new entries, and can thus check whether domains they are responsible for have had certificates issued that they did not expect.” Yet Section 9.3 makes this function optional for Monitors. I suggest the Monitor function be described in a fashion consistent with the notion expressed in the introduction, and remove references to detecting log misbehavior (which is better described as a audit function). In a prior e0-mai exchange with Rob, he indicated that his Monitor works this way, i.e., it observes logs for cert of interest, but does not perform log consistency checks.

[eranm@…]

Is the problem here that the term 'monitoring' means something different in this context, making the introduction and Section 9.3. inconsistent?
I can suggest a few resolutions:
(1) Replacing the word 'monitor' in the introduction with 'watch'.
(2) Modify the Monitor section to indicate a monitor can either ensure logs behave correctly, watch for certificates of interest or do both.

From what Steve says, it seems the term 'monitor' in CT context is used to refer both to monitors that audit logs and ones that just watch for certificates of interest, so option (2) seems more reasonable to me.

[eranm@…]

Out for review in ​https://github.com/google/certificate-transparency-rfcs/pull/136

[eranm@…]

Landed in ​https://github.com/google/certificate-transparency-rfcs/commit/7120d1867d40522f65c8fe19191388c6b88560c7