I know that RTIA-RTIG is out of scope because it's
a specific design choice, but I think may be there
could be some rationale about expected behavior if
a federate

1- unexpectedly quit the federation
2- resign from federation without unpublishing/deleting Object
   first


In the resign case, we have some indication
see 4.5  (HLA 1.3 document)

 Resign Federation Execution service shall accept an action argument that directs the RTI to perform zero or more of the following actions:
— Release all owned instance attributes for future ownership acquisition. This shall place the instance attributes
     into an unowned state (implying that their values are not being updated), which shall make them eligible for
     ownership by another federate. See Clause 7., Ownership management for a more detailed description.
— Delete all object instances for which the federate has that privilege (implied invocation of the Delete Object
     Instance service).

So a Federate may voluntarily resign from federation
without deleting  object instance or even set instance
attribute to unowned.

I think this would lead to the same state as the crash case?

This does not give us the answer but, I don't really know
what we should do in case of crash.

I don't know if we clearly thought
about 'failure' mode in CERTI.

Did you read something about failure secnarii
in HLA documents?

I add Pierre as cc for comment.