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

"M. Ranganathan" <mranga@gmail.com> Tue, 02 July 2019 17:22 UTC

Return-Path: <mranga@gmail.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 34B8F120651; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 10:22:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 Z0UepgOR0pge; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 10:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd30.google.com (mail-io1-xd30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFDB2120664; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 10:22:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd30.google.com with SMTP id k20so12493934ios.10; Tue, 02 Jul 2019 10:22:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Eh4A6O4fI5KBqveVJ+iBGVjgfPgJJJKshdYVhiDIhVY=; b=ogVo4D7QzQDIxD+ZnK9IVBBthYOnsv/NnuqKq538TZCUpfx4k5roAiK9klpuV+fML/ jskf/OlhKB+LG2ZzqZWIwOvR3x1s/3+CNhcJqdOvBXiKK0aferw1O4qdqdv9G8Je5IlA WwxDEuQBL4QnsRqSfMPngEBIEbZZfoDkdkr7lo1Q6cOBV0c432P5Tu3l6RefjbKKA2IK JoNOviq3vvAqF4LK2ilCj96zbu07xXBxrWuagjlrJY6jwPAUlIwZrULFdCVwk44nAwWw UrKfLgTjaGpZT1WhfYPvDYl9eGeKqNaoBL1Cx21ipvtoYpJEbZ755HXMJCj7M4RUhbQd WqFA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Eh4A6O4fI5KBqveVJ+iBGVjgfPgJJJKshdYVhiDIhVY=; b=poak//GXhQE8S7gmI4aMXC77xxoAVPccTL0I58Oe7GKxcBMmB1bE7cvaXf2Lt9v6C+ xMdPQtzQ2GM5LnYM8Ag9OqhRHjv6a/rjfWe75IELkLnPR0KWvXqYB/Q8ccqAWNDfCg5Z SHm5exdIjNIzL3vl/YT0azttyda3yx50EvbsNJdUq9viBSPByuludAZ8fv/6NT5qJz5U P0/S38cl2gy1/UglcEq5LbSDJSbbsx8ZigKAec46h5wA+01/Xkfd7JDUDmDs611rRhhz WKhpwZGjSv+eesOuNCRn5cxV8A0lMxWdTmWNcR0NEtMw8DWYAhJuxQlXmp8csAKDjNVY aqnw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWKpf/QEKVhDhILPCyabDkAZr6fr4nKMeCptzaqERMX3pHdZy4K q2jhElUpDc5TwwUfQ41K0a5Vc9rYUZYd/IugbZE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz5EiLCk5b66fyAIt7miS4/UNs7g2B1EcZTnuZgDkIiC2wvuqg/TpKuJ+xrtqP+/qRVgUAc18NbxUbYklkNmB4=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6602:2252:: with SMTP id o18mr31961684ioo.63.1562088152789; Tue, 02 Jul 2019 10:22:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAA49BC8F3@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com> <230EB786-36AB-4E79-A6DD-20278E895763@cisco.com> <CAHiu4JNMrZMX8upAnwEU1qvGie5WTONSsnWU8LfOfYO2Yh+CFg@mail.gmail.com> <FCFACB31-934A-4DED-A522-A6B13B40EA11@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <FCFACB31-934A-4DED-A522-A6B13B40EA11@cisco.com>
From: "M. Ranganathan" <mranga@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 13:21:56 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHiu4JO-0JMB1UEsH3LwbHVM6bXR+rsnFdB6=3A3ZtX1YHnR6g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Cc: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>, "opsawg@ietf.org" <opsawg@ietf.org>, "mud@ietf.org" <mud@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007479be058cb5fdb7"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/zUjwIkFQ7MhBLlyOJ2Vyo9XZRSU>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] [Mud] Declaring something to be a controller in MUD
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: Tue, 02 Jul 2019 17:22:36 -0000

Hello Eliot,

On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 2:10 AM Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote:

> Hi Ranga,
>
> Sorry for the pre-mature send.
>
> On 1 Jul 2019, at 20:51, M. Ranganathan <mranga@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> What is the essential difference between a device declaring itself to be a
> "controller" for another class and the situation where the device (being
> controlled) just uses the "model" abstraction in an ACE?
>
>
> You could indeed do this with “model”.  The reason I hadn’t thought of
> that was because in my mind, same-manufacturer and model were for NxN
> communications, and that it might be a hint to the NMS to use appropriate
> scale mechanisms.  But that’s not actually in the text.
>
> I think, by the way, that there’s another reason to think about doing this
> from the controller side: if the standards are open like we like them to
> be, a device may not know who should be the controller for a particular
> device or class.
>
>
Yes I agree with your reasoning - especially the second part. I think some
wording providing justification for this in the draft would be good  (maybe
even as an addendum to the MUD specification).

Looking forward to further discussion on how applications can become
controllers.

Regards, Ranga

> Eliot
>


-- 
M. Ranganathan