First, sorry for the delay in reviewing this -- I'm recovering from pneumonia and so it took longer than it should have.
I do have a few comments that I’d like addressed before I start IETF LC — addressing these now will avoid issues later in the process. I believe that all my comments are editorial, and should be easy fixes. Please explicitly let me know once you've posted a new version, just to make sure it doesn't slip through the cracks. Warren. ------- 1. Introduction The Internet has largely been constructed on general purpose computers; those devices that may be used for a purpose that is [O] computers; [P] computers: [R] punctuation specified by those who buy the device. ... Let us then posit a group of objects that are specifically NOT general purpose computers. These devices have a purpose to their use. By definition, therefore, all other purposes [O] purpose to their use. [P] specific purpose to their use. [R] clarity / continuity with previous are NOT intended. ... We use the notion of "manufacturer" loosely in this context, to simply mean the entity or organization that will state how a device [O] context, to simply mean [P] context to refer to [R] clarity and grammar is intended to be used. ... The key points are that the device itself is expected to serve a limited purpose, and that there may exist an organization in the supply chain of that device that will take responsibility for informing the network about that purpose. The intent MUD is to solve for the following problems: [O] intent MUD [P] intent of MUD [R] grammar In this specification we describe each of these building blocks and how they are intended to be used together. However, they may also be used separately, independent of this specification by local [O] independent of this specification [P] independent of this specification, [R] grammar deployments for their own purposes. 1.1. What MUD doesn't do ... How they are instantiated locally will depend on many factors, and is ultimately up to the [O] factors, [P] factors [R] grammar local network administrator, who must decide what is appropriate in a given circumstances. 1.2. A Simple Example A light bulb is intended to light a room. It may be remotely controlled through the network; and it may make use of a rendezvous [O] network; [P] network, [R] grammar service of some form that an app on smart phone accesses. 1.3. Determining Intended Use ... Profiling systems that make use of heuristics to identify types of systems have existed for years as well. A Thing could just as easily tell the network what sort of protection [O] protection [R] protection? Or access? it requires without going into what sort of system it is. 1.4. Finding A Policy: The MUD URL ... The IEEE has developed [IEEE8021AR] that provides a certificate-based approach to communicate device characteristics, which itself relies on [RFC5280]. [C]: "that provides" or "which provides"? ... In these cases, manufacturers may be able to map those identifies to particular MUD URLs (or even the files themselves). [O] indentifies [P] indentifiers [R] I think this is what was meant. Or perhaps identities? 1.5. Types of Policies ... For example: Allow access to devices of the same manufacturer Allow access to and from controllers via COAP [O] via COAP [R] Please expand COAP, it's not well known. To add a bit more depth that should not be a stretch of anyone's imagination, one could also make use of port-based access lists. [O] that should not be a stretch of anyone's imagination [R] I don't think this phrase makes sense in this context, or at least it sounded odd to me. ... While the policy examples given here focus on access control, this is not intended to be the sole focus. By structuring the model described in this document with clear extension points, so that other [O] , so that other [P], other [R] readability descriptions could be included. ... The "manufacturer" classes can be easily specified by the manufacturer, whereas controller classes are initially envisioned to be specified by the administrator. Because manufacturers do not know who will be using their devices, it is important for functionality referenced in usage descriptions to be relatively ubiquitous, and mature. For these reasons only a limited [O] ubiquitous, and mature [P] ubiquitous and mature [R] grammar subset YANG-based configuration of is permitted in a MUD file. 1.6. Terminology ... After it has processed a MUD file it may [O] After it has processed a MUD file it may [P] After it has processed a MUD file, it may [R] grammar direct changes to relevant network elements. ... 1.7. The Manufacturer Usage Description Architecture With these components laid out we now have the basis for an archicture. This leads us to ASCII art. [O] archicture [P] architecture [R] spelling / typo. ... The web site is typically run by or on behalf of the manufacturer. Its domain name is that of the authority found in the MUD URL. For legacy cases where Things cannot emit a URL, if the switch is able to determine the appropriate URL, it may proxy it, the trivial cases being a map between some registered Thing or port and a URL. [O] the trivial cases being a map between some registered Thing or port and a URL. [R] cannot parse this part of the sentence. ... Communication within those systems and from those systems to network elements is beyond the scope of this memo. [O] memo [P] document -- either is allowed, this is just a pet peeve of mine, so I always point it out. Feel free to ignore :-) 2. The MUD Model and Semantic Meaning ... To provide the widest possible deployability, publishers of MUD files SHOULD make use of the abstractions in this memo and avoid the use of [O] memo [P] document - as above :-p Also, is 'deployability' a real word now? MW doesn't seems to think so, nor does OE. ... Furthermore, only or "accept" or "drop" actions SHOULD be included. [O] only or [P] only [R] either we are missing a word before “or,” or or is not needed 3.4. is-supported This boolean is an indication from the manufacturer to the network administrator as to whether or not the Thing is supported. In this context a Thing is said to NOT be supported if the manufacturer intends never to issue an update to the Thing or never update the MUD file. A MUD controller MAY still peridocally check for updates. [O] peridocally [P] periodically [R] spelling ---- Thanks again, W -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg