IoT BCOP TF Document - Call for comments
Dear all, The IoT BCOP TF (/Jim Reid, Eliott Lear, Michael Richardson, Phil Stanhope, Peter Steinhäuser, Jelte Jansen, Jan Zorz, Sandoche Balakrichenan/) has been meeting almost every friday since RIPE 80 to produce the document titled : /"Architectural Considerations for IoT Device Security in the Home - //A guide for ISPs specifying CPE devices"/. The intention is to publish the final version of this document as RIPE Best Current Operational Practice (BCOP) document in the IoT scope. A Pdf format of the document is attached. Thanks for sending your comments on this document to the mailing list. Constanze & Sandoche (IoT WG Chairs)
Sandoche, thanks a lot for sending the document to the list asking for comments! Some reviewers voiced the opinion that it is more of a technical report than a (draft) BCOP. Any thoughts, opinions from the WG members would be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Peter
Am 13.10.2020 um 16:09 schrieb sandoche Balakrichenan <sandoche.balakrichenan@afnic.fr>:
Dear all,
The IoT BCOP TF (Jim Reid, Eliott Lear, Michael Richardson, Phil Stanhope, Peter Steinhäuser, Jelte Jansen, Jan Zorz, Sandoche Balakrichenan) has been meeting almost every friday since RIPE 80 to produce the document titled : "Architectural Considerations for IoT Device Security in the Home - A guide for ISPs specifying CPE devices". The intention is to publish the final version of this document as RIPE Best Current Operational Practice (BCOP) document in the IoT scope.
A Pdf format of the document is attached. Thanks for sending your comments on this document to the mailing list.
Constanze & Sandoche (IoT WG Chairs)
<ripe-iot-bcop-v2-1.pdf>
Hi Sandoche, It`s always good that we as an industry take security considerations seriously. Thus, we can´t ignore the European movements regulating the use of CPE on the customer side. The “BEREC Guidelines on Common Approaches to the Identification of the Network Termination Point in different Network Topologies” has to be taken into account. The European NRA`s are (in most cases) following these guidelines. For me this means that IoT security should be implemented in as little as possible devices connection the consumer to the internet - one device if at all possible thus avoiding stacked router scenarios that add unnecessary complexity and possibly even more IoT security issues. See: https://berec.europa.eu/eng/document_register/subject_matter/berec/regulator... Best regards, Eric van Uden AVM ICT GmbH Country Manager Netherlands Mr. van Coothlaan 10 6602 GT Wijchen Nederland Phone +31 24 6485381 Mobile +31 622 948356 e.vanuden@avm.de Bezoek onze website op http://nl.avm.de/ , vind ons leuk op Facebook of bekijk onze Google +-pagina en Youtube-kanaal. AVM GmbH for International Communication Technology, Alt-Moabit 95, 10559 Berlin, Germany HRB 48220 AG Charlottenburg, CEO (Geschäftsführer): Johannes Nill Von: "sandoche Balakrichenan" <sandoche.balakrichenan@afnic.fr> An: "RIPE IoT WG" <iot-wg@ripe.net> Datum: 13-10-2020 16:29 Betreff: [iot-wg] IoT BCOP TF Document - Call for comments Gesendet von: "iot-wg" <iot-wg-bounces@ripe.net> Dear all, The IoT BCOP TF (Jim Reid, Eliott Lear, Michael Richardson, Phil Stanhope, Peter Steinhäuser, Jelte Jansen, Jan Zorz, Sandoche Balakrichenan) has been meeting almost every friday since RIPE 80 to produce the document titled : "Architectural Considerations for IoT Device Security in the Home - A guide for ISPs specifying CPE devices". The intention is to publish the final version of this document as RIPE Best Current Operational Practice (BCOP) document in the IoT scope. A Pdf format of the document is attached. Thanks for sending your comments on this document to the mailing list. Constanze & Sandoche (IoT WG Chairs) [attachment "ripe-iot-bcop-v2-1.pdf" deleted by Eric van Uden/AVM] _______________________________________________ iot-wg mailing list iot-wg@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/iot-wg
Eric van Uden via iot-wg <iot-wg@ripe.net> wrote: > For me this means that IoT security should be implemented in as little as > possible devices connection the consumer to the internet - one device if > at all possible thus avoiding stacked router scenarios that add > unnecessary complexity and possibly even more IoT security issues. Fewer devices are better, but on the other hand, getting it done is also important. Sometimes better is in the way of good enough? -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
participants (4)
-
e.vanuden＠avm.de -
Michael Richardson -
Peter Steinhäuser -
sandoche Balakrichenan