Architecture Review of the RBAC Cip specifications

[stevenj]

The following draft CIPs need an architecture review, and any suggested changes submitted as a PR to these branches.

• https://github.com/input-output-hk/catalyst-CIPs/tree/x509-envelope-metadata/CIP-XXXX
  • CIP-???? | X509 RBAC Registration (1/5) - Metadata Envelope cardano-foundation/CIPs#810
• https://github.com/input-output-hk/catalyst-CIPs/tree/x509-role-registration-metadata/CIP-XXXX
  • CIP-???? | X509 RBAC Registration (2/5) - Role Registration cardano-foundation/CIPs#811
• https://github.com/input-output-hk/catalyst-CIPs/tree/x509-plutus-restricted-c509/CIP-XXXX
  • CIP-???? | X509 RBAC Registration (3/5) - Plutus restricted C509 Encoding cardano-foundation/CIPs#812
• https://github.com/input-output-hk/catalyst-CIPs/tree/x509-rbac-signing-with-cip30/CIP-XXXX
  • CIP-???? | X509 RBAC Registration (4/5) - Signing X509 RBAC Transactions with CIP-30 Wallet Connect cardano-foundation/CIPs#813
• https://github.com/input-output-hk/catalyst-CIPs/tree/x509-catalyst-role-definitions/CIP-XXXX
  • CIP-???? | X509 RBAC Registration (5/5) - Project Catalyst Role Definitions cardano-foundation/CIPs#814

Also add yourself to the Authors list in each PR you raise.

Consider the feedback from the upstream reviews, as linked above. However, do not consolidate the documents as requested in those reviews, as we will do that in a separate pass.