Although I haven’t been following this work closely, I believe MUD has some 
very interesting use cases, and I hope that work continues. I agree with Eliot 
that a working group must have a critical mass of people willing to do the 
work, not just show up at the meetings. I also think that once there are more 
than two or three drafts, on a topic we should move it out of OPSAWG, so MUD is 
a good candidate for a new WG.

-Qin
发件人: OPSAWG [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Ted Lemon
发送时间: 2019年7月31日 18:15
收件人: Eliot Lear <[email protected]>
抄送: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
主题: Re: [OPSAWG] [Mud] The future of MUD work

On Jul 31, 2019, at 4:45 AM, Eliot Lear <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 
wrote:
On the other hand, it shouldn’t just be me.  It’d be a very small working group 
;-) If others are interested, they should speak up.

I don’t think I would necessarily initiate work, but I suspect if there were a 
MUD WG I would show up for it and review documents.  The fact that MUD is in 
OPSAWG has meant that I don’t go because that’s not a WG I normally go to, and 
I didn’t realize that was where the MUD work was happening.

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Reply via email to