Re: Getting on with Things

Adrian Farrel <adrian(_at_)olddog(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
    >> I've floated an idea in draft-lear-mud-framework-00.txt which talks a
    >> little about this.  The idea is to learn what the Thing is and then
    >> have its manufacturer communicate to a deployment how the thing is
    >> intended to be used.

    > This approach worries me. While the manufacturer might not object to
    > this, the user and the system integrator should. The fact that a device
    > was manufactured for foo should not stop it being used for bar.

I haven't read Eliot's document yet.

I imagine the manufacturer initially says:
    Device FOO with Version BAR is believed to be safe on open
    Internet at date BAZ.

then they say:
    Device FOO with Version BAR is known to be unsafe on open
    Internet as of date BAZ, but is safe with ports X,Y,Z blocked.



--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature