Re: [Iotops] INXU documents --- Re: Question about updating drafts

[Sávyo Morais <[e-mail]>]

>
>  My feeling is that we need some solution in this space, but I'm not (yet)

convinced that your solution is the right one.
>

Either evolving (and improving) INXU or finding out a better approach,
I agree we need more discussion on that.

Anyways, there are some things I feel could be improved in INXU, but
before doing so it could be better to listen to the community's suggestions
and opinions.

In general, you should probably repost/edit your draft until such time as it
> gets adopted or there is rough consensus that it's a bad idea.
>

Many thanks, so I will make some edits to the current draft and send the
updated
document to OPSAWG and DOTS WG for further discussion, as you suggested.

Michael Sweet <msweet=[e-mail]> wrote:
>     > I skimmed the referenced draft along with RFC 8250, since I wasn't
>     > familiar with that work...  My $0.02 CAD is that if MUDs are being
>     > implemented by vendors then MTDs would be a useful addition.  But in
>     > the printer world we've only been talking about TNC and EAP for
>     > securing enterprise networks...
>

The current model in INXU uses MUD as a data source, but I understand that
it is plausible to use another tool to build the network communication
graph.
Here I can mention the MUD Generator from UNSW [1] that can be used to
profile the common behavior of the connected devices.

the problem is that todate, MUDs are not being implemented en mass by
> vendors.  There is a chicken and egg problem, and there still needs to be
> some strategic decisions to make it work out.
>

 From my side, I am trying to use the IGF IS3C [2] to make policymakers
know about MUD,
as well as talk about MUD to the LACNIC community (ISPs).

This way, I hope that if more people outside IETF know about MUD, we can
solve the
chicken and egg by making the vendors know that other stakeholders are
interested in MUD.

[1] https://github.com/ayyoob/mudgee
[2]
https://www.intgovforum.org/en/content/internet-standards-security-and-safety-coalition-is3c