Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-20

Alissa Cooper <> Thu, 19 April 2018 01:19 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72909126579; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:19:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=Akwnvobv; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=En7xiV+x
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aTuyyytnMPzO; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:19:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52287126C89; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:19:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal []) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9264B218F2; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 21:19:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 18 Apr 2018 21:19:19 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h=cc :content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; bh=KtXGaMz4J37HHenaS25mvIp0BGxlt18Sckt3L1Dq+XM=; b=Akwnvobv Z7eCtiTkIRCNhcsKpGNyoj6J/6lSm9syBjERXLize9iPewRfa1hN0Ko2oamiL79D UcTuozTq6U2qrO9y2NMUVY8fvqBSTVsctqTBYCXW1hvpB55O+E1/h9aptPyvvvLA 6aA3Q+m/ZPURFoZV/ggqYQPLqwElcPDBlICH46B8GI+QJr9CrEXotd7re2n3H6Xy xsbsS5ci5w2jN6qI15GcKX1r+zO4ibjQ0Iq6/UXK5nKMvFRcyuvTT15V7KgF5C+r iyAyeHxRX6lJxIGA9C+UI0YiFcgJhSGxgHDIXm/pl51fIjJtgdMtEcdvypTD4W85 EF0N2LJz/v30wg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=KtXGaMz4J37HHenaS25mvIp0BGxlt 18Sckt3L1Dq+XM=; b=En7xiV+xKbZddS/ul5ZH4/fwGZR/ICdwpuYuRSoxRoZJg OJCnI3AI/clSYWr/Wjt3N1OuuDESeh6RqXTcDlaQuMEqUfRuiVeDhRXS4OHZhfZO 4dxuGy5XkWfWejGfJFZ6MelO7usKUk1PpCOMr30QhQpkqZ8+ARkoKQeryQxGDtj6 kDxZd5/K5Oo3JLb7oll/jLvzZ7fWhT3K3Me19vWajAvknLkAyvpazF3iXtaz6EwQ 5azEyG8zOtxzHNlZx7ot/iycvYbnXpgvgegnlWFJ/F2wHLGEd9uWOITld6tBbKvl 2KYe6Q5gU6gQo77UPxUBvBEdUrxjz7HQxluwHuVIw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:l-7XWsHMMdfR4N8A1ye2TEHDsCxUxVlBwacVeHuyo20bHRRy-mGhsA>
Received: from (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C9E1FE4350; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 21:19:18 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1EA2D7C6-42A5-4827-A0E5-9EF8F811A787"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Alissa Cooper <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 21:19:18 -0400
Cc: Robert Sparks <>, IETF Gen-ART <>,,
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
To: Eliot Lear <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-20
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 01:19:22 -0000

Robert, thanks for your review. Eliot, thanks for addressing Robert’s comments. I have entered a Yes ballot.


> On Apr 12, 2018, at 8:17 AM, Eliot Lear <>; wrote:
> Hi Robert and everyone else,
> Circling for a landing here...
> On 11.04.18 18:15, Robert Sparks wrote:
>> With this, I'm puzzled about the use of the word standardized at all. I think I'm hearing that you expect MUD controllers to know about some well-known classes by convention and that groups like fairhair or someone else might make a list of classes that MUD controllers might collectively decide to build in knowledge of. Am I getting closer to the right picture? (This is opposed to a set of classes that are created by a standards action and listed in a registry somewhere).
> I've attempted to clarify this language as we discussed.  On the point of standardization, I've made a clean separation:
> URNs: standardized (and therefore hopefully well documented) behaviors, such as DNS and NTP.
> URIs that take the form of URLs.  These are just class names that the administrator has to fill out, or are otherwise somehow pre-populated.
> I hope that this resolves any lingering confusion.
> Thanks again for working to improve this document.  I really appreciate it!
> Eliot
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list