Weird appearence of the term requierments at the end of the document

[henkbirkholz]

Based on https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/okJriJPpapmZgeOfjbVGVP57bQk/

Depending on the use cases covered, there can be additional requirements. An exemplary subset is illustrated in this section.

Here starts to talk about “additional requirements”, but I wonder there is no other places in this draft talking about requirement, so what are the basic requirements?

[eckelmeckel]

Perhaps we should introduce a dedicated section "(Basic) Requirements", describing basic requirements, such as:

• "Integrity": The information provided by the Attester MUST be integral. This may be achieved by means of a digital signature over the attestation evidence.
• "(Attester) Authentication": The information provided by the Attester MUST be authentic. The Attester should authenticate itself to the Verifier. This may be an implicit authentication by means of a digital signature over the Attestation Evidence, which does not require additional protocol steps.

[eckelmeckel]

I suggest to place the new section"(Basic) Requirements" directly after "Scope and Intent".