IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSAWG] Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-20

Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com> Tue, 10 April 2018 17:20 UTC

Return-Path: <sob@sobco.com>
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 864711270A0; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 10:20:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 rpSadp60AGvm; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 10:20:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sobco.sobco.com (unknown [136.248.127.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E712B126CD8; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 10:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sobco.sobco.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 742DA6475252; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:20:18 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at sobco.com
Received: from sobco.sobco.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (sobco.sobco.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iUx85KimrjfC; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:20:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [10.220.219.137] (wrls-140-247-0-130.wrls.harvard.edu [140.247.0.130]) by sobco.sobco.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8404B647522A; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:20:14 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.3 \(3445.6.18\))
From: Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com>
In-Reply-To: <c19106cc-546c-0ecf-8e42-4847f54a024d@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:20:13 -0400
Cc: ops-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-opsawg-mud.all@ietf.org, opsawg@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <BC5784B5-00E1-4CA9-A4EE-1A66ECF350DF@sobco.com>
References: <152336540077.13556.13954379711415125489@ietfa.amsl.com> <c19106cc-546c-0ecf-8e42-4847f54a024d@cisco.com>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.6.18)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/p2O36ThPBIH8bicC8wHVX9r99xg>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-20
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 17:20:22 -0000

wfm

thanks

Scott

> On Apr 10, 2018, at 10:11 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Scott,
> 
> Thanks for your review.  Please see below.
> 
> 
> On 10.04.18 15:03, Scott Bradner wrote:
>> Reviewer: Scott Bradner
>> Review result: Has Nits
>> 
>> I did an OPS-DIR review of Manufacturer Usage Description Specification <
>> draft-ietf-opsawg-mud > The specification is well written and clear (I also
>> agree with Robert Spark's nits).
>> 
>> One suggestion about document organization: I would either move the discussion
>> of what should be done if the MUD controller can not retrieve the MUD file for
>> some reason or another out of the security considerations section to after
>> section 1.9 or at least include a forward pointer to the discussion.
>> 
> 
> I think this is a good point.  Section 1.6 ok with you?
> 
> Eliot
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> OPSAWG@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email