Re: [OPSAWG] MUD: Why reserve names for "well-known" controllers

Hi Eliot, On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Eliot Lear wrote: > Hi Ranga, > > Sorry I've been quiet for a few days. I'll have more to say later. > Please see below. > > > On 10/19/17 4:28 PM, M. Ranganathan wrote: > > > > I am not clear in my mind about why this should be the

Re: [OPSAWG] MUD : ACE with BOTH controller and src-dnsname

Hi Ranga, On 10/18/17 11:55 PM, M. Ranganathan wrote: > This is a made up example. > > Is the following ACE valid for MUD? > > "matches": { > "ietf-mud:mud-acl": { > "controller": "urn:ietf:params:mud:dns" > }, > "ipv4-acl":

Re: [OPSAWG] MUD: Why reserve names for "well-known" controllers

Hi Ranga, Sorry I've been quiet for a few days.  I'll have more to say later.  Please see below. On 10/19/17 4:28 PM, M. Ranganathan wrote: > > I am not clear in my mind about why this should be the case for NTP server > i.e. why do we reserve a special URN for NTP server? Why is it not just a

[OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community-03.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Operations and Management Area Working Group WG of the IETF. Title : Export BGP community information in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Authors