IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSAWG] [Fwd: Your thoughts on draft-richardson-mud-qrcode]

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sat, 20 March 2021 20:52 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 588B43A2A54; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 13:52:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 036FFC2HNAFe; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 13:52:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70CE83A2A4F; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 13:52:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A89138997; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 16:58:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id cx9CDc0jCZDt; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 16:58:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CEB83897B; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 16:58:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D99EE335; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 16:52:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>, "rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org" <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org>, "opsawg-chairs@ietf.org" <opsawg-chairs@ietf.org>, "opsawg@ietf.org" <opsawg@ietf.org>, iotops@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <e918dace64264028b2dcc6194d219a26@huawei.com>
References: <240866a424caca4cf10e5df833533ffe.squirrel@www.rfc-editor.org> <2a12c6bcb4bbbde5e4f046a9763272be.squirrel@www.rfc-editor.org> <366a510ca7b4412892eac3c9dba81337@huawei.com> <20640.1615925798@localhost> <e918dace64264028b2dcc6194d219a26@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 16:52:25 -0400
Message-ID: <13989.1616273545@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/8Xgit049h6TUw0ECxu_sb4YKiCs>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] [Fwd: Your thoughts on draft-richardson-mud-qrcode]
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 20:52:32 -0000

Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com> wrote:
    > Now we have IOTOPS for more bandwidth to discussion on MUD.
    > I think it would be a good idea to collect more interest in IOTOPS, and bring to OPSAWG.

I'm rather mystified by the meaning of this statement.
As WG chairs you are empowered to use your judgement, and you can run any
process you like to decide whether to adopt work, including, I like to
remind, doing it by fiat.  The "two week adoption call" is just a common process.

So, clearly you are suggesting some other process.
Perhaps you could explain to me what process you have envisioned here so that
I can follow it?

---

To those in the WGs, perhaps you could read:
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-richardson-mud-qrcode/

Editorial changes most welcome at https://github.com/CIRALabs/securehomegateway-mud/tree/ietf

I should note that there is almost no content in this document which the IETF
will have change control on. (I say almost, because I could say none, but I
might be wrong)

This is an application of a Reverse Logistics Association profile of the
MH10.8.2 Committee QR code control protocol to include an RFC8520 entry.


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email