October 2017 - iot-wg - mailman.ripe.net

[iot-discussion] The text of my email is not mentioned in the iot-discussion Digest, Vol 11, Issue 12
by Farzad Ebrahimi 29 Oct '17

29 Oct '17

1 0

[iot-discussion] About Remote lectures for students in different countries ...
by Farzad Ebrahimi 28 Oct '17

28 Oct '17

1 0

[iot-discussion] Outcome of the RIPE 75 Charter Discussion
by Marco Hogewoning 26 Oct '17

26 Oct '17

Dear colleagues, As we wrapped up the discussion, here is the text that the meeting agreed to present on Thursday: - To discuss challenges and opportunities of "IoT” for the RIPE community - To serve as a focal point for the RIPE NCC regarding community input to their IoT activities, including liaisons with other organisations - To invite IoT communities for a dialogue on matters of operational relevance, including security, the numbering system, and applicability of standards - To develop positions of the RIPE community on IoT matters With the note that once the plenary agrees to start the Working Group, it can review its charter and think about adding text as per Jim’s suggestion. The session video archives are already online and available via https://ripe75.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/iot/ And thanks to Jim Reid for volunteering to lead this effort in the closing plenary on Thursday and become the “chair elect” to help start this Working Group once the plenary agrees. From my side, thanks for all the support during this process and of course the attendance and comments received during the session. RIPE NCC remains committed to support this effort and are happy to assist where we can. Looking forward to the discussion on Thursday. Regards, Marco Hogewoning RIPE NCC

3 2

[iot-discussion] improved clarity on the IoT mailing list
by Jim Reid 26 Oct '17

26 Oct '17

Could people *please* stop replying on the list to email digests? It's far better and clearer for everyone to reply to individual messages. Better still is using relevant, meaningful Subject: headers. This makes it a lot easier to follow the discussion thread. It also helps whenever someone later needs to consult the list archives. An email discussion about the number of WG co-chairs (or whatever) under a Subject: thread of "Digest, Vol X, Issue Y" from some months ago will not be particularly useful. thanks

1 0

Re: [iot-discussion] iot-discussion Digest, Vol 11, Issue 10
by Karen Tadevosyan 26 Oct '17

26 Oct '17

Hi all, 2-3 co chairs is right decision, as a iot has a wide range of applications in different fields. Sent from my iPhone > On 26 հոկ, 2017թ., at 11:27, iot-discussion-request(a)ripe.net wrote: > > Send iot-discussion mailing list submissions to > iot-discussion(a)ripe.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/iot-discussion > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > iot-discussion-request(a)ripe.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > iot-discussion-owner(a)ripe.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of iot-discussion digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Announcement of a nomination for the co-chair of IoT WG > (Farzad Ebrahimi) > 2. Re: My Idea about the number of IoT WG co-chairs (Vahan Hovsepyan) > 3. Re: iot-discussion Digest, Vol 11, Issue 9 (Vahan Hovsepyan) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 14:51:18 +0400 > From: Farzad Ebrahimi <ebrahimi(a)IoTAcademy.ir> > To: iot-discussion(a)ripe.net > Subject: [iot-discussion] Announcement of a nomination for the > co-chair of IoT WG > Message-ID: <c9a93947-c395-3573-5af3-1a5da21715a3(a)IoTAcademy.ir> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/iot-discussion/attachments/201710…> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 11:23:33 +0400 > From: Vahan Hovsepyan <vhovsepyan(a)ripe.net> > To: Farzad Ebrahimi <ebrahimi(a)IoTAcademy.ir> > Cc: "avetik. yessayan" <avetik.yessayan(a)shte.am>, > olga_kyryliuk(a)ukr.net, Elif Sert <eelifsert(a)gmail.com>, > iot-discussion(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [iot-discussion] My Idea about the number of IoT WG > co-chairs > Message-ID: <70B9E836-83E5-4B34-B2FB-ACEDC9AEA1AB(a)ripe.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hi, Farzad! > > Indeed, IoT has a number of layers, so there, most probably, might be a need for several co-chairs, also to give a leadership to people that can overtake it. I would suggest to identify the layers where WG will be active so it would be possible to understand how many co-chairs we need, if any:) > > Sincerely, > > Vahan Hovsepyan > External Relations Officer > Caucasus and Central Asia > RIPE NCC > Tel. +374 94 258900 > E-mail: vhovsepyan(a)ripe.net <mailto:vhovsepyan@ripe.net> > > > > >> On 25 Oct 2017, at 19:04, Farzad Ebrahimi <ebrahimi(a)IoTAcademy.ir> wrote: >> >> Dear Colleagues, >> >> I?m strongly recommend to have 2 or 3 co-chairs for IoT WG, because the IoT concept is very wide topic and needs a team of co-chairs for handling. >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Farzad >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> -- >>> Farzad Ebrahimi >>> Chairman & Founder >>> IoT Academy of Iran >>> Address: Unit 25, Floor 5, No.49, Abshar Complex, Daman Afshar St., Dafine St., Mirdamad Blvd, Tehran, Iran. >>> Postal Code: 1969765183 >>> Tel: (+9821) 86081025 >>> Fax: (+9821) 88872445 >>> Cell:(+98912) 3707085 >>> http://www.IoTAcademy.ir <http://www.iotacademy.ir/> >

2 1

Re: [iot-discussion] iot-discussion Digest, Vol 11, Issue 9
by Vahan Hovsepyan 26 Oct '17

26 Oct '17

Hi, Jim! Strongly agree! Sincerely, Vahan Hovsepyan External Relations Officer Caucasus and Central Asia RIPE NCC Tel. +374 94 258900 E-mail: vhovsepyan(a)ripe.net <mailto:vhovsepyan@ripe.net> > On 25 Oct 2017, at 14:00, iot-discussion-request(a)ripe.net wrote: > > Send iot-discussion mailing list submissions to > iot-discussion(a)ripe.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/iot-discussion > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > iot-discussion-request(a)ripe.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > iot-discussion-owner(a)ripe.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of iot-discussion digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Outcome of the RIPE 75 Charter Discussion (Marco Hogewoning) > 2. Charter for IoT WG (Jim Reid) > 3. another step towards the IoT WG (Jim Reid) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 16:19:57 +0400 > From: Marco Hogewoning <marcoh(a)ripe.net> > To: iot-discussion(a)ripe.net > Subject: [iot-discussion] Outcome of the RIPE 75 Charter Discussion > Message-ID: <EEDA252E-65B9-4B5B-81D4-FBDC6C11A4F8(a)ripe.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > Dear colleagues, > > As we wrapped up the discussion, here is the text that the meeting agreed to present on Thursday: > > - To discuss challenges and opportunities of "IoT? for the RIPE community > - To serve as a focal point for the RIPE NCC regarding community input to their IoT activities, including liaisons with other organisations > - To invite IoT communities for a dialogue on matters of operational relevance, including security, the numbering system, and applicability of standards > - To develop positions of the RIPE community on IoT matters > > With the note that once the plenary agrees to start the Working Group, it can review its charter and think about adding text as per Jim?s suggestion. > > The session video archives are already online and available via https://ripe75.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/iot/ > > And thanks to Jim Reid for volunteering to lead this effort in the closing plenary on Thursday and become the ?chair elect? to help start this Working Group once the plenary agrees. > > From my side, thanks for all the support during this process and of course the attendance and comments received during the session. RIPE NCC remains committed to support this effort and are happy to assist where we can. > > Looking forward to the discussion on Thursday. > > Regards, > > Marco Hogewoning > RIPE NCC > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 08:26:25 +0100 > From: Jim Reid <jim(a)rfc1035.com> > To: iot-discussion(a)ripe.net > Subject: [iot-discussion] Charter for IoT WG > Message-ID: <3B812FBB-410D-4023-923F-3BB381006E60(a)rfc1035.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > For those of you who weren't in Dubai and didn't follow the web cast, there was strong consensus in the room for the following text as the WG's charter: > > ? To discuss challenges and opportunities of "IoT? for the RIPE community > > ? To serve as a focal point for the RIPE NCC regarding community input to their IoT activities, including liaisons with other organisations > > ? To invite IoT communities to for a dialogue on matters of operational relevance, including security, the numbering system, and applicability of standards > > ? To develop positions of the RIPE community on IoT matters > > > If anyone has concerns or comments about the (hopefully final) charter, please speak up now. > > The charter text is going to go for approval at the closing plenary tomorrow, at which point the WG will be created. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 08:48:43 +0100 > From: Jim Reid <jim(a)rfc1035.com> > To: iot-discussion(a)ripe.net > Subject: [iot-discussion] another step towards the IoT WG > Message-ID: <9C052755-709C-4565-96E7-D2C3C891403C(a)rfc1035.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > I have volunteered to serve as an initial co-chair of the WG-to-be. There was strong consensus for this at the plenary session yesterday. > > Assuming tomorrow's plenary endorses that decision, the first thing to do is to get the WG to reach consensus on a co-chair selection process. Once that's in place, we'll use the process to appoint co-chairs. My preference would be to get the selection process decided before we discuss potential candidates and ask for volunteers. Best not entangle these things. > > A few people have expressed interest in becoming a co-chair and some of them thought I'd make the decision. I won't. The WG will decide that using whatever selection process we agree. There will be a public announcement in due course inviting people to volunteer/nominate candidates. > > We should also discuss the requirements and responsibilities for the IoT WG's co-chairs. That may need some clarification before we use the selection process once we have one. My personal opinion is co-chairs might need to engage with SDOs, industry fora and participate in IoT-related workshops like that ENISA/Europol thing last week. However this will be something for the WG to decide. > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > iot-discussion mailing list > iot-discussion(a)ripe.net > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/iot-discussion > > > ------------------------------ > > End of iot-discussion Digest, Vol 11, Issue 9 > *********************************************

1 0

Re: [iot-discussion] My Idea about the number of IoT WG co-chairs
by Vahan Hovsepyan 26 Oct '17

26 Oct '17

Hi, Farzad! Indeed, IoT has a number of layers, so there, most probably, might be a need for several co-chairs, also to give a leadership to people that can overtake it. I would suggest to identify the layers where WG will be active so it would be possible to understand how many co-chairs we need, if any:) Sincerely, Vahan Hovsepyan External Relations Officer Caucasus and Central Asia RIPE NCC Tel. +374 94 258900 E-mail: vhovsepyan(a)ripe.net <mailto:vhovsepyan@ripe.net> > On 25 Oct 2017, at 19:04, Farzad Ebrahimi <ebrahimi(a)IoTAcademy.ir> wrote: > > Dear Colleagues, > > I’m strongly recommend to have 2 or 3 co-chairs for IoT WG, because the IoT concept is very wide topic and needs a team of co-chairs for handling. > > Best Regards, > > Farzad > > Sent from my iPhone > >>> >> -- >> Farzad Ebrahimi >> Chairman & Founder >> IoT Academy of Iran >> Address: Unit 25, Floor 5, No.49, Abshar Complex, Daman Afshar St., Dafine St., Mirdamad Blvd, Tehran, Iran. >> Postal Code: 1969765183 >> Tel: (+9821) 86081025 >> Fax: (+9821) 88872445 >> Cell:(+98912) 3707085 >> http://www.IoTAcademy.ir <http://www.iotacademy.ir/>

1 0

[iot-discussion] Announcement of a nomination for the co-chair of IoT WG
by Farzad Ebrahimi 25 Oct '17

25 Oct '17

1 0

[iot-discussion] another step towards the IoT WG
by Jim Reid 25 Oct '17

25 Oct '17

I have volunteered to serve as an initial co-chair of the WG-to-be. There was strong consensus for this at the plenary session yesterday. Assuming tomorrow's plenary endorses that decision, the first thing to do is to get the WG to reach consensus on a co-chair selection process. Once that's in place, we'll use the process to appoint co-chairs. My preference would be to get the selection process decided before we discuss potential candidates and ask for volunteers. Best not entangle these things. A few people have expressed interest in becoming a co-chair and some of them thought I'd make the decision. I won't. The WG will decide that using whatever selection process we agree. There will be a public announcement in due course inviting people to volunteer/nominate candidates. We should also discuss the requirements and responsibilities for the IoT WG's co-chairs. That may need some clarification before we use the selection process once we have one. My personal opinion is co-chairs might need to engage with SDOs, industry fora and participate in IoT-related workshops like that ENISA/Europol thing last week. However this will be something for the WG to decide.

1 0

[iot-discussion] Charter for IoT WG
by Jim Reid 25 Oct '17

25 Oct '17

For those of you who weren't in Dubai and didn't follow the web cast, there was strong consensus in the room for the following text as the WG's charter: ∙ To discuss challenges and opportunities of "IoT” for the RIPE community ∙ To serve as a focal point for the RIPE NCC regarding community input to their IoT activities, including liaisons with other organisations ∙ To invite IoT communities to for a dialogue on matters of operational relevance, including security, the numbering system, and applicability of standards ∙ To develop positions of the RIPE community on IoT matters If anyone has concerns or comments about the (hopefully final) charter, please speak up now. The charter text is going to go for approval at the closing plenary tomorrow, at which point the WG will be created.

1 0

[iot-discussion] Reminder: RIPE 75 IoT Session is about to start (24 October, 10:00 UTC)
by Marco Hogewoning 24 Oct '17

24 Oct '17

Dear colleagues, As agreed during the closing plenary of RIPE 74, there is a dedicated session on Internet of Things as part of the RIPE 75 programme. This session will start at 14:00 local time today, which is 10:00 UTC (Amsterdam/Paris 12:00, London 11:00). For those not able to join us here in Dubai, remote participation is also available. Please see https://ripe75.ripe.net for details on how to join online and the agenda. Regards, Marco Hogewoning -- External Relations - RIPE NCC

1 0

[iot-discussion] New on RIPE Labs: Key Factors for the Successful Entry of Developing Countries into the Internet of Things
by Mirjam Kuehne 23 Oct '17

23 Oct '17

Dear colleagues, Please see this new article by Farzad Ebrahimi on RIPE Labs: Key Factors for the Successful Entry of Developing Countries into the Internet of Things https://labs.ripe.net/Members/farzad_ebrahimi/key-factors-for-the-successfu… Farzad Ebrahimi is one of the RACI fellows at RIPE 75 and will present about this during the IoT session on Tuesday. Kind regards, Mirjam Kuhne RIPE NCC

1 0

[iot-discussion] RIPE 75 draft agenda now confirmed and available
by Marco Hogewoning 22 Oct '17

22 Oct '17

Dear colleagues, During last week’s IoT Roundtable meeting in Leeds, the attendees also discussed a draft agenda for the IoT session during the upcoming RIPE meeting in Dubai. The participants agreed to the agenda as it was previously posted to this list by my colleague Gergana: A. Update on Online Trust Alliance (OTA) - Kevin Meynell, Internet Society B. Update on Internet of Things Meeting in Leeds - Marco Hogewoning, RIPE NCC C. Trusted Routing in the Internet of Things - Ivana Tomic, Imperial College London D. Key Factors for the Successful Entry of Developing Countries into the Internet of Things - Farzad Ebrahimi, Internet of Things Academy of Iran E. Discussion on Future Work and Draft Charter (Open Microphone) The talks by Ivana and Farzad have been submitted via the RIPE Academic Cooperation Initiative (RACI). This draft agenda is now also available via https://ripe75.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/iot/ We hope to see you all in Dubai on Tuesday 24 October from 14:00 to 15:30 local time. As this is now part of the main RIPE meeting programme, this session will also offer remote participation for those unable to join us in Dubai. A more detailed report regarding the Roundtable in Leeds, which also involved some discussion related to item E is being prepared and we aim to publish that next week. Should you have any questions please feel free to respond to this list or me personally. Regards, Marco Hogewoning -- External Relations - RIPE NCC

9 17

[iot-discussion] New on RIPE Labs: RIPE Atlas Probes as IoT Devices
by Mirjam Kuehne 20 Oct '17

20 Oct '17

Dear colleagues, As a follow-up to the presentation Robert Kisteleki gave during the IoT Roundtable Meeting in September [1], we have published a RIPE Labs article describing RIPE Atlas probes as IoT devices and some initial design decisions that we thought were important for such an infrastructure: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/kistel/ripe-atlas-probes-as-iot-devices Kind regards, Mirjam Kuhne RIPE NCC [1] https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/roundtable/september-2017/ripe-io…

1 0

[iot-discussion] Report from the RIPE IoT Roundtable in Leeds on 27 September 2017
by Marco Hogewoning 05 Oct '17

05 Oct '17

Dear colleagues, We have now published a short report of the RIPE IoT Roundtable that took place on 27 September in Leeds. We again would like to thank all the participants that joined us there, the people that where kind enough to present some of their work to to group and of course everybody for all their feedback and the lively discussion. A special thanks to our host AQL that provided us with the meeting location and on site support. The report is available on our website: https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/roundtable/september-2017/ripe-io… As mentioned before on this list, a short report of this meeting will also be presented during the RIPE 75 IoT session, to serve as input for the discussion there. Regards, Marco Hogewoning -- External Relations - RIPE NCC

1 0

[iot-discussion] Fwd: [Int-area] Liaison statement received from ITU-T regarding a "Reference Model of IPv6 Addressing Plan for Internet of Things Deployment"
by Rob Evans 05 Oct '17

05 Oct '17

Hi, This seems to cover areas where RIPE IPv6/IoT people might have some expertise. Cheers, Rob Forwarded message: > From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan(a)gmail.com> > To: 6lo(a)ietf.org, 6man WG <ipv6(a)ietf.org>, 6tisch(a)ietf.org, int-area > <int-area(a)ietf.org>, int-dir(a)ietf.org, iot-dir(a)ietf.org, its(a)ietf.org, > lp-wan(a)ietf.org, lwip(a)ietf.org > Subject: [Int-area] Liaison statement received from ITU-T regarding a > "Reference Model of IPv6 Addressing Plan for Internet of Things > Deployment" > Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 22:53:45 -0400 > > Hi all, > The IETF has received a liaison statement from the ITU-T that their > Study Group SG20 is inviting inputs from the IETF regarding a work > item titled "Reference Model of IPv6 Addressing Plan for Internet of > Things > Deployment” and the deadline for providing inputs is 2018/01/28. The > statement can be found at > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1546/ > > I have no further info and I am trying to get access to the referenced > documents. I just want to provide a heads up while that is in process. > > Thanks > Suresh > > > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list > Int-area(a)ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

4 4

[iot-discussion] the IoT WG charter
by Jim Reid 03 Oct '17

03 Oct '17

A quick and dirty outline charter for the IoT WG-to-be was prepared during the BoF at RIPE74. This was presented in the closing plenary as an indication about what the WG might do once it was established. It wasn’t the charter though. That’s still to be decided. Peter Koch suggested the much clearer (IMO) charter proposal below: o to discuss challenges and opportunities of "IoT” for the RIPE community o to serve as a focal point for the NCC regarding community input to their IoT activities, including liaisons o to invite IoT communities to for a dialogue on matters of operational relevance, including security, the numbering system, and applicability of standards o to develop positions of the RIPE community on IoT matters, operational and beyond I think this is much more suitable and support Peter’s text. Though we could lose “operational and beyond” from the last bullet point. Any comments or suggestions? I hope this list can reach (rough) consensus on the above text - or something fairly close to that. If so, we should be able to adopt this in Dubai without the need for a long discussion in the room.

3 2