Re: [OPSAWG] [Mud] Declaring something to be a controller in MUD

Eliot Lear <> Wed, 26 June 2019 21:30 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5411B1202B4; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 14:30:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OxxQcRlwZV3w; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 14:30:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CFE6120140; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 14:30:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=2859; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1561584629; x=1562794229; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc: to:references; bh=kPpy6UQz0d7j6zfCtcWcdDmjJGd9A8GcejMWhFWcsTM=; b=HBp5nHzK7YVM4MR4DxfJqoX4yxUVo4NdfeFG0ZvtKqh0kh17jootripQ 07bDa54jtPOiO8lowv4z55dmbxiWd+RKcu8NWSj31Gfph2kpBnNZEl9aR x899PIzOMg2YTTHh4fnAUQlJ3XMzVtZSsOum/BiAMfZr15eCKTG7MmjHd 8=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 195
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,421,1557187200"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="13567216"
Received: from (HELO ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 26 Jun 2019 21:30:26 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x5QLUPHS028501 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 26 Jun 2019 21:30:26 GMT
From: Eliot Lear <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1B2458D9-F3BD-4F70-8C2B-5FBF48A12F7E"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 23:30:24 +0200
In-Reply-To: <13929.1561584386@localhost>
Cc:,, "M. Ranganathan" <>
To: Michael Richardson <>
References: <> <1547.1561492346@localhost> <> <11505.1561563275@localhost> <> <13929.1561584386@localhost>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] [Mud] Declaring something to be a controller in MUD
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 21:30:31 -0000

> On 26 Jun 2019, at 23:26, Michael Richardson <> wrote:
> Eliot Lear <> wrote:
>>>> There will ALWAYS be a need for an administrator in the enterprise
>>>> case.  But maybe with the options above we can ease the consumer burden
>>>> over time.  In the consumer case, you might want an app for initial
>>>> device admission control anyway, no?  Can we not rely on that
>>>> interaction as an approval step in this instance?
>>> I think we'd all like to have a generic app (with an RFC standard API) that
>>> can onboard any device and can do admission control for any controller.
>>> I think this is what you are saying as well.
>> Yes, but I was saying a bit more.  Do you expect to fully automate the
>> inclusion of a controller into a controller class in the home?  How do
>> you envision the full flow looking like?
> I expect to fully automate the inclusion of a controller into that class,
> yes.   I'd like to automate the device into the class too.
> Perhaps your point is that since the controller has to onboard (at the
> layer-7) the device in anyway: can we leverage that?

For devices that are designed as controllers, yes.

>>> yes, this is exactly what I was thinking about.
>>> Would "mud-urls" / "include" be mutually exclusive?
>> I don’t see why it would have to be.  But now let’s back up, just to
>> make sure we’re not digging too deep a hole for the application case
>> that Ranga wants to get to.  If the MUD protected device is declaring
>> MUD URLs for MUD controllers and that is what all of this would boil
>> down to, then the app case is really a completely separate mechanism,
>> because apps don’t have MUD-URLs.
>> If we do a two-stage, then we need a completely separate draft for apps
>> anyway, but I was hoping for some commonality.
> Hmm.

Indeed.  But let’s not get wrapped around the axle here.  I’ll try and have something out for the controller case, and then let’s talk about the other in Montreal.  Ok?