Re: [OPSAWG] Ignas Bagdonas' No Objection on draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-20: (with COMMENT)

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ignas,


On 17.04.18 16:08, Ignas Bagdonas wrote:
> Ignas Bagdonas has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-20: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-mud/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> S2.1: Valid MUD file will contain "mud" and "acls" containers - what if it does
> not, especially if it does not contain an ACL container - how will the
> connectivity requirement be interpreted then?

I proposed the following to EKR to clarify:
>
> A valid MUD file MUST contain a "mud" container and MAY contain an
> optional access-lists container that will be present whenever access
> controls are to be requested.

>
> A few nits:
>
> s/MUR-URL/MUD-URL
>
> s/yang/YANG in the document and module description fields.
>
> s/dns/DNS in the modules.
>
> S1, MUD building blocks section: "A URL that is can be used"
>
>

All corrected, thanks!

Eliot