In the next revision of the document, I think it would be good to work together to add some clarifications on the following points:
Clarify if the owner recognizable data in the payload replaces or augments the matching of the MAC address in the “owned accessory identification". If it replaces the MAC, then we should clarify the requirements on the MAC address.
Clarify the section 6.1.1. and 6.1.2. in "owned accessory identification” to include a length and offset for the matching when using data from the payload along describing the matching as a byte comparisons.
If the data in the payload replaces rather than augments the MAC comparison, we should have a requirement that the matching must be over 46bit minimum, so the probability of the platform of mis-categorizing an accessory as “Owned” remains low.
From Yannick Sierra:
In the next revision of the document, I think it would be good to work together to add some clarifications on the following points: