- cooperation-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Candidature Co-Chair for the RIPE Cooperation WG
by Alain Van Gaever 25 Oct '13

25 Oct '13

Dear all, During the conference in Athens a couple of week ago, I noticed that the RIPE community could use some help in their relations with the European Institutions and other governmental organisations. Given my background in both technology and legislation/policy I thought I could lend a hand. I worked 8 years in the European Commission and worked (among others) on the current European Telecoms legislation. Currently I work in the CTO office of Ofcom - the U.K. national telecom regulator. If you want more background information on me, feel free to check out my LinkedIn profile: uk.linkedin.com/in/alainvangaever/ Therefore – if the RIPE community approves – I would like to introduce my candidature for co-chairing the RIPE Cooperation working group. With kind regards, Alain Van Gaever

1 0

New on RIPE Labs: How “National” is the Dutch Critical IP Infrastructure?
by Mirjam Kuehne 23 Oct '13

23 Oct '13

Dear colleagues, For those of you who missed Razvan C. Oprea's presentation during the MAT-WG at the recent RIPE Meeting in Athens, we put a summary report on RIPE Labs: How “National” is the Dutch Critical IP Infrastructure? https://labs.ripe.net/Members/benno_overeinder/dutch-critical-ip-infrastruc… This is a contribution by Benno Overeinder, Fahimeh Alizadeh and Razvan C. Oprea. Kind regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC

1 0

Neelie Kroes calls for a serious global debate on Internet Governance
by Gordon Lennox 22 Oct '13

22 Oct '13

Worth an attentive listen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLzB8gyq43k

1 0

European Parliament
by Gordon Lennox 21 Oct '13

21 Oct '13

The European Internet Foundation includes a group of MEPs who have a clear interest in Internet matters. https://www.eifonline.org/members.html There are others of course! Gordon

6 5

Cooperation WG co-shair self nomination
by Meredith Whittaker 17 Oct '13

17 Oct '13

Hello all, I'm interested in working with you to continue to the growth and development of an empirical, technically-founded, data-based voice in policy and governance. I would be taking on this role in my personal capacity, not as a representative of my employer. Bio/soapbox: I'm a Program Manager at Google Research, focusing on Open Source and Open Data (net: how do we provide verifiable data in place of rhetoric and assurances of trustworthiness?). I know many of you (hello!), and those I know have likely heard me monologue about the need for the technical community's input in policymaking. This is my wheelhouse -- in the quest not to totally mess up the Internet, I can think of few things more important. Both because naive political mandates could seriously harm the utility and viability of the most revolutionary engine for human communication since Gutenberg, and because (listen up) these same careless mandates almost certainly take no account of the way networks *actually work,* hampering Operators (your) agency to make sensible decisions and innovations. All that to say, I'd be honored and happy to work with the formidable intellects at RIPE to help develop this technical voice. With some deference to brevity, I'll leave it there. Please ask me any questions. Cheers, Meredith -- Meredith Whittaker Program Manager, Google Research Google NYC

1 0

Draft RIPE NCC submission on EU NIS Directive
by Chris Buckridge 16 Oct '13

16 Oct '13

Dear colleagues, As noted in the recent RIPE Labs article on European Union (EU) engagement, the RIPE NCC has been working with representatives of the RIPE community to address the European Commission's proposed EU Directive on network and information security (NIS). This proposed Directive is currently under consideration by the European Parliament and is available online at: http://eeas.europa.eu/policies/eu-cyber-security/cybsec_directive_en.pdf The aim of this Directive is "to ensure a high common level of network and information security (NIS) across the EU", specifically through the establishment of national Computer Emergency Response Teams (CERTs), improved information sharing between national authorities and required reporting on risk levels and security incidents by providers of "information society services". RIPE community members and RIPE NCC staff have identified several areas of concern with the current draft of the Directive, and these concerns form the basis of the draft response below. We would like to invite feedback from this working group on whether there is support for the position(s) taken in the statement, whether there is support for the RIPE NCC engaging Members of the European Parliament on this issue, and any other thoughts. There will also be a discussion of this issue in the RIPE 67 Cooperation Working Group session, which takes place on Thursday, 17 October, 16:00-17:30 local time (UTC+3). You can follow and contribute to this session either on-site in Athens or remotely at: https://ripe67.ripe.net/live/ Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC -------------------------- The RIPE NCC welcomes the European Commission's efforts in the area of network and information security (NIS), premised on the need for closer international cooperation to meet the global nature of network security issues. We also welcome the Directive's acknowledgement of the need for all stakeholder groups to participate in developing solutions to NIS challenges. Drawing on discussions with members of the RIPE community and internally, the RIPE NCC would like to raise a general concern with the current draft. While the proposed Directive recognises the importance of "informal cooperation mechanisms", we believe that there is an important and formal role for multi-stakeholder mechanisms and processes in refining the implementation details of the Directive. Recognition of such a role would be particularly useful in relation to the following specific aspects of the Directive: 1. Scope The RIPE NCC believes that there is a need to clarify the scope of the Directive, particularly with regard to the following terms: - "information society services which enable the provision of other information society services" - "significant impact" (in relation to security incidents) In line with the purpose and the legal basis of the Directive (i.e. ensuring the functioning of the Internal Market according to Article 26 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union), we believe that the Directive should be clearly limited to organisations or security incidents that directly impact the Internal Market. Clear criteria should be developed via transparent, multi-stakeholder processes to identify those incidents or organisations covered by the Directive. 2. Establishment of security requirements The Directive aims to establish security requirements for market operators and public administrations, and to this end it empowers the Commission to: - Draw up a list of standards by means of implementing acts [1] - Adopt delegated acts concerning the definition of circumstances in which public administrations and market operators are required to notify incidents The Cybersecurity Strategy of the European Union notes the role of multi-stakeholder, bottom-up procedures in developing and maintaining security standards. We believe it would be appropriate that the specification of such standards and definitions in the context of this Directive should also be the outcome of such formal, multi-stakeholder processes. This would help to ensure the inclusion of input from all relevant stakeholders and the flexibility and responsiveness that is required in an online environment. [1] Definitions of "implementing acts" and "delegated acts": http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/institutional_affairs/treaties/lisbo…

1 0

RIPE NCC Engagement with the EU
by Chris Buckridge 02 Oct '13

02 Oct '13

Dear colleagues, We have published a new article on RIPE Labs, outlining the RIPE NCC's general strategy for engaging with the institutions of the European Union. It also looks specifically at recent legislative proposals regarding electronic identification (eID) and network and information security (NIS): https://labs.ripe.net/Members/chrisb/engaging-with-eu-legislative-process As ever, we welcome all feedback and discussion, either on the Cooperation Working Group mailing list, or on the RIPE Labs page. We also look forward to further discussion of these issues at the upcoming RIPE 67 Cooperation Working Group session. Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

7 6

Agenda - Cooperation WG at RIPE 67 in Athens
by Maria Häll 16 Sep '13

16 Sep '13

Dear all, See agenda below. RIPE 67 Cooperation Working Group DRAFT AGENDA A. Panel: IXPs, Internet Traffic and Public Policy (Moderated by Patrik Fältström, Netnod) B. Update on Proposed EU Electronic Identification (eID) and Trust Services Regulation (Athina Fragkouli, RIPE NCC) C. ICANN European Strategy Development (Nigel Hickson, ICANN) D. RIPE NCC External Relations Update: The Year Ahead (Paul Rendek, RIPE NCC) E. Planning for RIPE Cooperation WG Co-Chair Z. AOB See you in Athens! / Maria Häll, co-chair RIPE Cooperation WG

1 0

[news] RIPE NCC Commits Additional Support to the Internet Governance Forum
by Axel Pawlik 02 Sep '13

02 Sep '13

Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC has announced that it will provide 50,000 USD in financial support for the upcoming Internet Governance Forum (IGF) event in Bali, Indonesia. This one-time contribution is provided in response to an urgent appeal from the IGF 2013 Secretariat Committee, and is in addition to the 100,000 USD already provided by the five Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) via the Number Resource Organization (NRO). Both ARIN and APNIC have made the same commitment to additional funding for the eighth IGF event, and others in the multi-stakeholder community have also committed to increasing their contributions. The IGF is a major annual venue for Internet governance-related discussions, bringing together a diverse range of Internet stakeholders from around the world to consider a wide range of subjects. It has also served as an important platform for the RIPE NCC to defend the open and bottom-up processes of the RIR system. The ongoing health and stability of this forum is key to the realisation of true multi-stakeholder governance of the Internet. The RIRs have repeatedly argued the need for significant, ongoing financial commitments from all stakeholder groups. Concerns about whether the 2013 event would be able to proceed have served to highlight the fragility of the IGF with its current funding base. In making this additional contribution, the RIPE NCC again calls on all Internet stakeholders to contribute financially to the IGF. Only through a broad, multi-stakeholder base of support can we ensure that the IGF will continue to serve its very important role in Internet governance. Kind regards, Axel Pawlik Managing Director RIPE NCC

1 0

[news] RIPE NCC Responds to UN CSTD Questionnaire on Enhanced Cooperation
by Chris Buckridge 02 Sep '13

02 Sep '13

Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC has submitted responded to a public questionnaire posted by the United Nations Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) Working Group on enhanced Cooperation. Our response reflects the many efforts of the RIPE NCC and RIPE community to build productive relationships across traditional stakeholder divisions, in the spirit of enhanced cooperation. The full text of our submission is available at: https://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/news/industry-developments/cstd-… Best regards Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

1 0

Enabling CDN-ISP Collaboration
by Georgios Smaragdakis 16 Jul '13

16 Jul '13

Dear all, - In T-Labs/TU Berlin we maintain a website with all our research activities on CDN-ISP collaboration that are very related to RIPE Cooperation working group objectives: http://www.smaragdakis.net/research/Collaboration - For the most recent document on CDN-ISP collaboration and Network Functions Virtualization please see our paper that appears in ACM SIGCOMM CCR July 2013 issue: "Pushing CDN-ISP Collaboration to the Limit" http://www.smaragdakis.net/publications/CCR-NetPaaS best regards, --George ---------------------------------- Georgios Smaragdakis, Senior Researcher Deutsche Telekom Laboratories Technical University of Berlin http://www.smaragdakis.net

1 0

Redirecționat: new draft CAs Redirecționat: ITRE draft report on eIDAS - invitation to the 3rd shadows' meeting on Tuesday, 2 July 2013 in Strasbourg at 9h00-10h00 (meeting room S4.5 - Louise Weiss)
by ANDERSDOTTER Amelia 01 Jul '13

01 Jul '13

Dear all, I was given the advice to send this e-mail to the cooperation group of RIPE. I know that you have had concerns with the system proposed by the European Commission for trust service providers in it's eIDAS regulation, and that you held a special hearing on this topic on Thursday May 17th (https://ripe66.ripe.net/archives/steno/21/). I have also understood that you were largely unsatisfied with the Commission's insurances. The issue in the European Parliament is as follows: You can find the complete set of amendments on the regulation as proposed by the industry committee here: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/itre/draft-reports.html?linkedD… You can also find a systematic of the amendments that I personally tabled here: http://ameliaandersdotter.eu/dossiers/eid And so you may notice that many of the amendments actually go sort of the right direction. Now we are in "compromise proceedings". This means that representatives from the various political groups (I represent the Greens/EFA) meet to discuss how to politically proceed with the file. On the topic of QTSPs I have proposed deleting all mentioning of qualified X in favour of a model that promotes transparency (responsible vulnerability disclosure, audit reports, transparent instruction sets from supervisory bodies, etc). Basically a self-regulatory model where, if something goes wrong, the idea is that it is known and can be fixed. However, qualified X and advanced X are legacies from the e-signatures directive in 1999. The Commission has not proposed to remedy this system even though it has turned out not to work in any member state and mostly not been conducive to any particular development. I have argued with my colleagues that security-by-transparency is much more supported and promoted in the community that actually develops secure solutions for whatever, and that security-by-policy is a legacy system which has proven mostly to fail. Further it means unnecessary red-tape with no benefit, as well as a risk of lock-in for crucial society functions. Unfortunately, member in the European Parliament have been given a very poor base of making decisions on this issue from the European Commission, and now we need for the Conservative group (EPP) to either agree or not that red-tape and lock-in are bad things, with little additional value for society, or not. If not, it may well be that a grand coalition of S&D and EPP keeps all the qualified stuff in, thereby destroying, I fear, many of the functioning self-regulatory models already in existance. I am not really able to carry this argument on my own though - the problem for me is that I am up against a 13 year old legislation (e-sig directive 1999) that the Commission in its wisdom has chosen not to change much, other than making it into a regulation, despite having investigated it for a long time. It would be very helpful if RIPE were to support my case before, say, Tuesday July 2nd so that we can have the EPP not flat out reject my approach of not creating stupid paper work for no good reason. Should anyone have any specific questions about my proposed transparency requirements they are free to contact me at any time, you can also check the above provided links. best regards, Amelia Piratpartiet ________________________________________ De la: Patrik Fältström [paf(a)frobbit.se] Trimis: 29 iunie 2013 16:21 Către: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia Cc: maria(a)sunet.se; gordon.lennox(a)gmail.com; fredrik(a)kirei.se; athina.fragkouli(a)ripe.net; leifj(a)sunet.se Subiect: Re: new draft CAs Redirecționat: ITRE draft report on eIDAS - invitation to the 3rd shadows' meeting on Tuesday, 2 July 2013 in Strasbourg at 9h00-10h00 (meeting room S4.5 - Louise Weiss) Amelia, I think you directly could send mail to cooperation wg of RIPE... ;-) <cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net> As well as other activities. Patrik On 29 jun 2013, at 14:45, ANDERSDOTTER Amelia <amelia.andersdotter(a)europarl.europa.eu> wrote: > dear all, > > in thse compromise amendments we could have had responsible vulnerability disclosure and a removal of the qualified stuff that i believe many of you are in agreement with me should not be there. > > however, the EPP needs to be convinced that red tape is not good. > > if the EpP could be convinced of this then the S&D will cave. > > however, at present we are lacking lobbies that are backing me up in these claism, and so we are likely to go for security-by-policy rather than security-by-transparency. and then we will also have trustmarks in article 18a(new) since ITRE will not over-ride IMCO unless ITRE chooses a different approach from IMCO whcih we do not if we go for security-by-policy and trustmarks. > > and so, i in no way wish to stress you unduly in your important activities, but i anyway have done so now, because the compromises are important. > > /a > > ________________________________________ > De la: KAARTINEN Elina > Trimis: 28 iunie 2013 17:10 > Către: KAARTINEN Elina; ULVSKOG Marita; DEL CASTILLO Pilar; CREUTZMANN Jürgen; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia; KARIM Sajjad > Cc: ULVSKOG Marita OFFICE; DEL CASTILLO Pilar OFFICE; CREUTZMANN Jürgen OFFICE; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia OFFICE; STROMGREN Kristoffer; GARCIA JONES Miguel José; SANCHEZ MUNOZ Carmen; GISSLER Constantin; HUFNAGEL Sebastian; BENCZE Julien; YU Wan Tung Perlie; BAIER Klaus; ALEXANIAN Patrick; BALAZ Zlatko; BALLOT-DU FAYET DE LA TOUR Heloise; BRACHOWICZ Maciej Jan; BURSI Camilla; CHALENCON Delphine; DELGINIESSE Christine; FRISOVA Jolana; GIL DE MURO ARENAS Jose Antonio; GOLDSMITH Gareth Jon; GOUNAUD Pauline; GULBE Ance; JANKEVICIUS Edmundas; JOSE Michael John; KROPAITE Egle; LEBERLE Heike; LEVOYANNIS Constantine; LINNEMANN Tobias; MASSEI Manlio; MERGULHAO Teresa; MONTANO Elisabetta; MURRAY Grace; PETRE Nicholas; POLES Christopher; QUERTON Isabelle; RAQUET Michel; RAYM Maxim; REIJNEN Jeroen; RUDOLF Michael; SALAGNAC Catherine; SANTAMARIA Veronica; SERVELLON Sergio; SOEIRO Renato; SOUSA DE JESUS Alfredo; TELEJKO Bartlomiej; TOENNIS Melanie; TOTH Edina; VANDEWALLE Laurence; WYLIE Daniel; ZIOBRO Witold Wladyslaw; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia OFFICE2; KARIM Sajjad OFFICE; ERSHAD Sakib > Subiect: ITRE draft report on eIDAS - invitation to the 3rd shadows' meeting on Tuesday, 2 July 2013 in Strasbourg at 9h00-10h00 (meeting room S4.5 - Louise Weiss) > > Dear Members, > dear colleagues, > > the rapporteur Ms Ulvskog would like to invite you to a shadows' meeting that will take place on Tuesday, 2 July 2013 in Strasbourg at 9h00-10h00 (meeting room S4.5 - Louise Weiss). > > Please, find enclosed the revised CA proposal for the e-ID part. Furthermore the rapporteur would like to support the idea of the replacement of the word identification with the word authentication in articles 3(2) and 3(3) and all other articles which do not obviously relate to the definition of "electronic identification". The CA text to this effect will be proposed by the rapporteur later. > > Please, find attached also the very first draft CAs concerning the trust services part. These CAs are still very preliminary and still subject to changes. The rapporteur would like to however already discuss these proposals with you next week. Further CAs will follow on the trust services part to cover all related articles. > > The scope of the shadows' meeting would be: > - to reach a political agreement on the first set of CAs (e-ID part of Regulation) > - discuss further the enclosed CAs on the trust services and define the framework for the remaining part of the Regulation > > Kind regards, > Elina > > Elina Kaartinen > Administrator > European Parliament > Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) - Secretariat > Rue Wiertz 60 > B-1047 Brussels > Office (BRU): ATR 00 K 065 > Tel (BRU): +32 2 283 2388 > Email: elina.kaartinen(a)europarl.europa.eu<mailto:elina.kaartinen@europarl.europa.eu> > > http://www.europarl.europa.eu<http://www.europarl.europa.eu/> > > > > ________________________________ > From: KAARTINEN Elina > Sent: 18 June 2013 12:05 > To: KAARTINEN Elina; ULVSKOG Marita; DEL CASTILLO Pilar; CREUTZMANN Jürgen; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia; KARIM Sajjad > Cc: ULVSKOG Marita OFFICE; DEL CASTILLO Pilar OFFICE; CREUTZMANN Jürgen OFFICE; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia OFFICE; STROMGREN Kristoffer; GARCIA JONES Miguel José; SANCHEZ MUNOZ Carmen; GISSLER Constantin; HUFNAGEL Sebastian; BENCZE Julien; YU Wan Tung Perlie; BAIER Klaus; ALEXANIAN Patrick; BALAZ Zlatko; BALLOT-DU FAYET DE LA TOUR Heloise; BRACHOWICZ Maciej Jan; BURSI Camilla; CHALENCON Delphine; DELGINIESSE Christine; FRISOVA Jolana; GIL DE MURO ARENAS Jose Antonio; GOLDSMITH Gareth Jon; GOUNAUD Pauline; GULBE Ance; JANKEVICIUS Edmundas; JOSE Michael John; KROPAITE Egle; LEBERLE Heike; LEVOYANNIS Constantine; LINNEMANN Tobias; MASSEI Manlio; MERGULHAO Teresa; MONTANO Elisabetta; MURRAY Grace; PETRE Nicholas; POLES Christopher; QUERTON Isabelle; RAQUET Michel; RAYM Maxim; REIJNEN Jeroen; 'RUDOLF Michael'; SALAGNAC Catherine; SANTAMARIA Veronica; SERVELLON Sergio; SOEIRO Renato; SOUSA DE JESUS Alfredo; TELEJKO Bartlomiej; TOENNIS Melanie; TOTH Edina; VANDEWALLE Laurence; WYLIE Daniel; ZIOBRO Witold Wladyslaw; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia OFFICE2; KARIM Sajjad OFFICE; ERSHAD Sakib > Subject: ITRE draft report on eIDAS - invitation to the 2nd shadows' meeting in Brussels on Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 15h30-16h30 > Importance: High > > Dear Members, > dear colleagues, > > the rapporteur Ms Ulvskog would like to invite you to a shadows' meeting that will take place in in Brussels on Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 15h30-16h30. The meeting will concentrate on the trust services part of the eIDAS Regulation. > > As discussed in Strasbourg last week, there will be also a third shadows' meeting before the summer break. It is planned for Tuesday, 2 July 2013 in Strasbourg at 9h00-10h00 (meeting room S4.5 - Louise Weiss). Could you kindly take already also note on this meeting and put it in your calendar. > > In the meanwhile and as agreed the draft compromises (e-ID part) will be circulated by email. > > Kind regards, > Elina > > > ________________________________ > From: KAARTINEN Elina > Sent: 10 June 2013 15:19 > To: KAARTINEN Elina; ULVSKOG Marita; DEL CASTILLO Pilar; CREUTZMANN Jürgen; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia; KARIM Sajjad > Cc: ULVSKOG Marita OFFICE; DEL CASTILLO Pilar OFFICE; CREUTZMANN Jürgen OFFICE; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia OFFICE; STROMGREN Kristoffer; GARCIA JONES Miguel José; SANCHEZ MUNOZ Carmen; GISSLER Constantin; HUFNAGEL Sebastian; BENCZE Julien; YU Wan Tung Perlie; BAIER Klaus; ALEXANIAN Patrick; BALAZ Zlatko; BALLOT-DU FAYET DE LA TOUR Heloise; BRACHOWICZ Maciej Jan; BURSI Camilla; CHALENCON Delphine; DELGINIESSE Christine; FRISOVA Jolana; GIL DE MURO ARENAS Jose Antonio; GOLDSMITH Gareth Jon; GOUNAUD Pauline; GULBE Ance; JANKEVICIUS Edmundas; JOSE Michael John; KROPAITE Egle; LEBERLE Heike; LEVOYANNIS Constantine; LINNEMANN Tobias; MASSEI Manlio; MERGULHAO Teresa; MONTANO Elisabetta; MURRAY Grace; PETRE Nicholas; POLES Christopher; QUERTON Isabelle; RAQUET Michel; RAYM Maxim; REIJNEN Jeroen; 'RUDOLF Michael'; SALAGNAC Catherine; SANTAMARIA Veronica; SERVELLON Sergio; SOEIRO Renato; SOUSA DE JESUS Alfredo; TELEJKO Bartlomiej; TOENNIS Melanie; TOTH Edina; VANDEWALLE Laurence; WYLIE Daniel; ZIOBRO Witold Wladyslaw; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia OFFICE2; KARIM Sajjad OFFICE; ERSHAD Sakib > Subject: REMINDER - ITRE draft report on eIDAS - shadows' meeting in Strasbourg on 12 June 2013 at 9h00-10h30 meeting room M04096 (Winston Churchill) + AMs now available in all languages > Importance: High > > Dear Members, > dear colleagues, > Further to the shadows' meeting on Wednesday, 12 June at 9h00-10h30 (meeting room M04096/Winston Churchill), the amendments translated in all languages can be found from here: > > http://www.itrenet.ep.parl.union.eu/itrenet/cms/cache/offonce/welcome/work_… > > Kind regards, > Elina > > ________________________________ > From: KAARTINEN Elina > Sent: 29 May 2013 09:35 > To: ULVSKOG Marita; DEL CASTILLO Pilar; CREUTZMANN Jürgen; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia; KARIM Sajjad > Cc: ULVSKOG Marita OFFICE; DEL CASTILLO Pilar OFFICE; CREUTZMANN Jürgen OFFICE; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia OFFICE; STROMGREN Kristoffer; GARCIA JONES Miguel José; SANCHEZ MUNOZ Carmen; GISSLER Constantin; HUFNAGEL Sebastian; BENCZE Julien; YU Wan Tung Perlie; BAIER Klaus; ALEXANIAN Patrick; BALAZ Zlatko; BALLOT-DU FAYET DE LA TOUR Heloise; BRACHOWICZ Maciej Jan; BURSI Camilla; CHALENCON Delphine; DELGINIESSE Christine; FRISOVA Jolana; GIL DE MURO ARENAS Jose Antonio; GOLDSMITH Gareth Jon; GOUNAUD Pauline; GULBE Ance; JANKEVICIUS Edmundas; JOSE Michael John; KROPAITE Egle; LEBERLE Heike; LEVOYANNIS Constantine; LINNEMANN Tobias; MASSEI Manlio; MERGULHAO Teresa; MONTANO Elisabetta; MURRAY Grace; PETRE Nicholas; POLES Christopher; QUERTON Isabelle; RAQUET Michel; RAYM Maxim; REIJNEN Jeroen; 'RUDOLF Michael'; SALAGNAC Catherine; SANTAMARIA Veronica; SERVELLON Sergio; SOEIRO Renato; SOUSA DE JESUS Alfredo; TELEJKO Bartlomiej; TOENNIS Melanie; TOTH Edina; VANDEWALLE Laurence; WYLIE Daniel; ZIOBRO Witold Wladyslaw; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia OFFICE2; KARIM Sajjad OFFICE; ERSHAD Sakib > Subject: ITRE draft report on eIDAS - shadows' meeting in Strasbourg on 12 June 2013 at 9h00-10h30 meeting room M04096 (Winston Churchill) > Importance: High > > Dear Members, > dear colleagues, > > Further to the amendments (XM file) circulated last week, the rapporteur Ms Ulvskog would like to invite you to a shadows' meeting that will take place in Strasbourg on 12 June 2013 at 9h00-10h30 meeting room M04096 (Winston Churchill). > > If possible, could you inform the ITRE Secretariat (Elina Kaartinen) in advance on your availability. > > Kind regards, > Elina Kaartinen > ITRE Secretariat > > ________________________________ > From: KAARTINEN Elina > Sent: 24 May 2013 14:08 > To: ULVSKOG Marita; DEL CASTILLO Pilar; CREUTZMANN Jürgen; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia; KARIM Sajjad > Cc: ULVSKOG Marita OFFICE; DEL CASTILLO Pilar OFFICE; CREUTZMANN Jürgen OFFICE; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia OFFICE; STROMGREN Kristoffer; GARCIA JONES Miguel José; SANCHEZ MUNOZ Carmen; GISSLER Constantin; HUFNAGEL Sebastian; BENCZE Julien; TRAUNG Peter; GUCCIONE Stefano; YU Wan Tung Perlie; DE WIT Catharina; CECIRE Alessandra; BAIER Klaus; ALEXANIAN Patrick; BALAZ Zlatko; BALLOT-DU FAYET DE LA TOUR Heloise; BRACHOWICZ Maciej Jan; BURSI Camilla; CHALENCON Delphine; DELGINIESSE Christine; FRISOVA Jolana; GIL DE MURO ARENAS Jose Antonio; GOLDSMITH Gareth Jon; GOUNAUD Pauline; GULBE Ance; JANKEVICIUS Edmundas; JOSE Michael John; KROPAITE Egle; LEBERLE Heike; LEVOYANNIS Constantine; LINNEMANN Tobias; MASSEI Manlio; MERGULHAO Teresa; MONTANO Elisabetta; MURRAY Grace; PETRE Nicholas; POLES Christopher; QUERTON Isabelle; RAQUET Michel; RAYM Maxim; REIJNEN Jeroen; 'RUDOLF Michael'; SALAGNAC Catherine; SANTAMARIA Veronica; SERVELLON Sergio; SOEIRO Renato; SOUSA DE JESUS Alfredo; TELEJKO Bartlomiej; TOENNIS Melanie; TOTH Edina; VANDEWALLE Laurence; WYLIE Daniel; ZIOBRO Witold Wladyslaw; KONKEL Agnieszka; KONSTANTOPOULOS Panos; DE FRUTOS GOMEZ Jose Manuel; KNÖFEL Susanne; ANDERSDOTTER Amelia OFFICE2; DEL MONTE Micaela; RODRIGUES Joao; PUPPAN Daniel; ELEFTERIE Kristina; TANG Kaisa; PORRINO Fabrizio; SILVEIRA DA CUNHA Patricia; RODRIGUES Joao; ANAGNOSTOPOULOU Ioanna; PUPPAN Daniel; PORRINO Fabrizio; DE FRUTOS GOMEZ Jose Manuel; AHNBORG Sara; TANG Kaisa; KNÖFEL Susanne; DEL MONTE Micaela; KONKEL Agnieszka; VASILE-TOVORNIK Alina Gabriela; KARIM Sajjad OFFICE; ERSHAD Sakib; KAARTINEN Elina > Subject: ITRE draft report on eIDAS - amendments (2 XM files) - consideration of the amendments ITRE meeting of 19-20 June 2013 > > Dear Members, > dear colleagues, > > please, find enclosed already for your information the amendments tabled to the ITRE draft report on eIDAS (XM files). > > A shadows' meeting in Strasbourg in June has been planned (exact time and place tbc). > > The consideration of the amendments will take place in the ITRE meeting of 19-20 June 2013 > > > Timetable as reminder: > > Indicative Timetable ITRE Report > > Exchange of views > > 18 December 2012 > > > > > Consideration of draft report > > 24 April 2013 > > Deadline for tabling amendments > > 15 May 2013 at 12h00 > > > > > Consideration of amendments > > > 19-20 June 2013 > > Vote ITRE (mandate) > > > 18-19 September 2013 > > Vote Plenary > > tbc > > > > > Kind regards, > Elina > > Elina Kaartinen > Administrator > European Parliament > Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) - Secretariat > Rue Wiertz 60 > B-1047 Brussels > Office (BRU): ATR 00 K 065 > Tel (BRU): +32 2 283 2388 > Email: elina.kaartinen(a)europarl.europa.eu<mailto:elina.kaartinen@europarl.europa.eu> > > http://www.europarl.europa.eu<http://www.europarl.europa.eu/> > > > <draft CAs- 1st version- Art 1-8+ Recitals- version 26 June.doc><CA on trust services article 11-14 Eidas 280613.doc>

2 1

RIPE NCC Response to Proposed EC Regulation on Electronic ID and Trust Services
by Axel Pawlik 28 Jun '13

28 Jun '13

Dear colleagues, At the recent RIPE 66 Meeting, Andrea Servida of the European Commission delivered a presentation on the proposed EU Regulation on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market. Video, transcript and minutes of the session are available at: https://ripe66.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/coop-wg/ Text of this proposed Regulation is available on the European Commission website: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52012PC0238:EN:… [available in various languages and formats] Based on the RIPE 66 presentation and the discussions that it provoked, the RIPE NCC has identified a number of serious concerns with the proposal, and we believe that the current proposal text may be interpreted in ways that conflict with the basic intent of the Regulation. Specifically, we believe that the proposal could be interpreted as applying to technologies and services beyond electronic identification (eID) and eID-related trust services, perhaps extending to cover unrelated technologies to eID such as Domain Name Security Extensions (DNSSEC) and Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). An analysis about the scope of the proposed Regulation and possible implications can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/internet-governance/multi-stakeh… Such a broad scope for the Regulation could serve to inhibit efforts by the Internet technical community in the EU (often in collaboration with colleagues and counterparts around the world) to secure the infrastructure of the Internet. We also believe that such a broad scope is not the intention of the Regulation. The RIPE NCC plans to send a letter, detailing our concerns and specific suggestions for edits to the text of the Regulation, to relevant Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), European Commission staff and government officials. A draft of this letter can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/internet-governance/multi-stakeh… It is important to send this letter quickly to ensure that officials have a chance to reflect on our concerns before committing to a position on the Regulation. With that in mind, we would appreciate any feedback from the RIPE community on the language of the letter, the positions and the strategy. Such feedback may be provided on the Cooperation Working Group mailing list or directly to the RIPE NCC at <ncc(a)ripe.net>. We would also welcome any information that community members can provide on MEPs that might have an interest in this issue. We encourage RIPE community members to contact their national MEPs regarding this Regulation, and please feel free to use any or all of the language found in the draft RIPE NCC letter. Best regards, Axel Pawlik Managing Director, RIPE NCC

3 2

RIPE NCC Launches New Initiatives at EuroDIG 2013
by Chris Buckridge 27 Jun '13

27 Jun '13

Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC has posted a report on our participation at last week's EuroDIG (European Dialogue on Internet Governance) meeting in Lisbon, including two new initiatives launched by the RIPE NCC at the event: https://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/news/about-ripe-ncc-and-ripe/rip… Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

1 0

eID and Trust Services
by Gordon Lennox 21 Jun '13

21 Jun '13

Here is a video of an exchange in the Parliament on the topic presented and discussed in Dublin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPqbqjisF6Y Regards, Gordon

1 0

Re: [cooperation-wg] RIPE NCC Response to Proposed EC Regulation on Electronic ID and Trust Services
by Michele Neylon :: Blacknight 17 Jun '13

17 Jun '13

Axel Thanks to you and RIPE for taking the lead on this. I've forwarded it to a couple of other interested parties. With respect to the current draft I'm supportive of the proposed text Regards Michele On 17 Jun 2013, at 03:49, Axel Pawlik <ripencc-management(a)ripe.net> wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > At the recent RIPE 66 Meeting, Andrea Servida of the European Commission delivered a presentation on the proposed EU Regulation on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market. Video, transcript and minutes of the session are available at: > https://ripe66.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/coop-wg/ > > Text of this proposed Regulation is available on the European Commission website: > http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52012PC0238:EN:… > [available in various languages and formats] > > Based on the RIPE 66 presentation and the discussions that it provoked, the RIPE NCC has identified a number of serious concerns with the proposal, and we believe that the current proposal text may be interpreted in ways that conflict with the basic intent of the Regulation. > > Specifically, we believe that the proposal could be interpreted as applying to technologies and services beyond electronic identification (eID) and eID-related trust services, perhaps extending to cover unrelated technologies to eID such as Domain Name Security Extensions (DNSSEC) and Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). An analysis > about the scope of the proposed Regulation and possible implications can be found at: > https://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/internet-governance/multi-stakeh… > > Such a broad scope for the Regulation could serve to inhibit efforts by the Internet technical community in the EU (often in collaboration with colleagues and counterparts around the world) to secure the infrastructure of the Internet. We also believe that such a broad scope is not the intention of the Regulation. > > The RIPE NCC plans to send a letter, detailing our concerns and specific suggestions for edits to the text of the Regulation, to relevant Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), European Commission staff and government officials. A draft of this letter can be found at: > https://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/internet-governance/multi-stakeh… > > It is important to send this letter quickly to ensure that officials have a chance to reflect on our concerns before committing to a position on the Regulation. With that in mind, we would appreciate any feedback from the RIPE community on the language of the letter, the positions and the strategy. Such feedback may be provided on the Cooperation Working Group mailing list or directly to the RIPE NCC at <ncc(a)ripe.net>. > > We would also welcome any information that community members can provide on MEPs that might have an interest in this issue. We encourage RIPE community members to contact their national MEPs regarding this Regulation, and please feel free to use any or all of the language found in the draft RIPE NCC letter. > > Best regards, > > Axel Pawlik > Managing Director, RIPE NCC > -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://mneylon.tel/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845

1 0

Minutes Cooperation WG - RIPE66 Dublin
by Maria Häll 03 Jun '13

03 Jun '13

Dear Coop WG friends, Here are the minutes from the meeting: Cooperation Working Group Agenda Thursday, 16 May 11:00 – 12:30 The Co-Chairs introduced the agenda. Maria Häll noted her new role as CEO for SUNET, the Swedish university network. A. RIPE NCC External Relations Update Paul Rendek, Chris Buckridge, RIPE NCC Paul Rendek spoke about the RIPE NCC's External Relations work, focusing on developments in the law enforcement area and some of the issues that have been raised by Internet stakeholders in the Middle East (including suggestions of the need for an "Arab RIR"). Chris Buckridge presented updates on two International Telecommunication Union (ITU) events, the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12) and the World Telecommunications/ICT Policy Forum (WTPF-13). He also discussed the Internet-related work going on in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which the RIPE NCC and industry partners are contributing to via the Internet Technical Advisory Committee (ITAC) to the OECD. Jim Reid noted the challenges faced in engaging a complex organisation like the ITU, and asked about the broader strategy of RIPE NCC to handle this. Chris noted that goal was to address the government concerns at the heart of the complex discussions, and that coordination and resource-sharing between technical organisations (including the other RIRs and I* organisations) was vital to achieving this in the ITU context. Paul Rendek also noted that the complexity and specificity of the ITU forums can be a strength, providing an outlet for ITU stakeholders to consider or study issues without affecting policy-making in other forums. Tahar Schaa noted a defensive tone in some of the RIRs' submissions in the WTPF process, and argued that the RIRs should be more confident in pressing the case that the current governance systems have been responsible for the Internet's emergence and growth. He also suggested that many of the issues identified by governments, such as multilingual TLDs, are not pressing issues for Internet users. Chris noted that this kind of feedback is one reason that the RIPE NCC reports on its engagement in such detail. He also noted that there is a need to engage governments without aggravating their concerns - how to achieve this is an ongoing discussion. Constanze Bürger commended the RIPE NCC's engagement, and encouraged other governments to bring their concerns to open forums such as the RIPE Cooperation Working Group. B. eID and Trust Services Regulation in the EU Andrea Servida, European Commission DG CONNECT Andrea Servida presented on the European Commission's draft European Regulation regarding electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the EU market. He described the scope of the proposed Regulation, its intended purpose, and how the Commission sees it being implemented by Member States. Jim Reid questioned how the electronic data gathered by eID services would be stored, used or potentially misused. Andrea noted that the set-up of such systems (including safeguards for user data) would generally be handled at a national level, but that at the cross-border level, the European Commission will work to establish appropriate mechanisms to ensure that only the information necessary for a specific purpose can be accessed. Patrick Tarpey asked about the intended use of secondary national legislation and whether this might result in security and operational practices differing from state to state, including the strength of cryptographic controls. He noted that such differences could means gaps in security. Andrea noted that the proposal is intended to improve on the current situation, and that while there may be differences across states, the Commission is working with Member States to ensure that there will be common levels of security assured. Patrick sought clarification on whether this might result in different approaches to revocation of cryptographic material; Andrea noted that the goal of the Regulation would be to help harmonise such differences across Member States. Tahar Schaa questioned whether the Regulation was intended to cover (or create competition for) existing electronic identification mechanisms from the private sector, such as Google or Amazon IDs. Andrea noted that the intention is that Member States could decide to bring any existing identification mechanisms, whether public or private, under legislation within the framework of the Regulation. He clarified though that the intent is only for the Regulation to cover identification schemes used to access public services. Patrik Fältström noted that Article 5 of the Regulation notes that the Commission will maintain a list of electronic ID schemes to be accepted by EU Member States, and expressed surprise that the Commission had not been involved in the discussions surrounding development and deployment of DNSSEC and RPKI schemes. He identified a clash between such schemes, developed through bottom-up processes in the technical community, and this Regulation. Andrea argued that the Commission had conducted extensive public consultation, and that the Regulation leaves the choice to Member State which eID schemes to use; the list maintained by the Commission will help facilitate the use of eIDs across different countries which will require building trust. D. Public/Private Cooperation on Internet Issues: The Irish Experience Michele Neylon, Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd Michele Neylon presented on the Irish Internet industry and its relationship to the Irish government, particularly regarding Internet governance issues. He also noted that the Irish industry has been relatively slow in IPv6 adoption. Donal Cunningham noted that his company had been asked, when tendering for a government project, to include IPv6 compatibility, and that the government then followed up by actually asking for their IPv6 allocation. Brian Nisbet noted that one area of positive activity from the Irish government was that the Department of Communications and Department of Education had been investing heavily in broadband for schools. Michele suggested that while there was good work being done, it was being done in isolation, and that better coordination between the public and private sectors would be welcome. C. Building Cooperation with the Academic Networks Community Maria Häll, SUNET Maria delivered a very brief presentation, noting her new role with the Swedish university network, and highlighting the importance of cooperation between all stakeholder groups, including academia. She emphasised her hope to see national research and education networks (NRENs) take a greater interest in Internet governance issues. Paul Rendek noted that the RIPE NCC is focused on building relationships with NRENs, and this includes helping them get involved in Internet governance discussions. Maria closed the meeting. _________________________________ Best regards, Maria Häll Co-Chair RIPE Cooperation WG

1 0

CoE -"Network Neutrality and Human Rights"
by Gordon Lennox 03 Jun '13

03 Jun '13

Last week the Council of Europe had a "multi-stakeholder dialogue on network neutrality and human rights". See: http://www.coe.int/t/informationsociety/ http://www.coe.int/t/informationsociety/NN%20Conf%202013/default_en.asp It was a good meeting. Some of the flavour can be had from Chris Marsden's opening presentation. http://www.slideshare.net/EXCCELessex/pre-history-of-european-network-neutr… A short outcomes paper of the major points of discussion is now being prepared which will, after participants comments, be communicated to the 47 member state representatives of the CoE Steering Committee on Media and Information Society (CDMSI) to consider and propose further action. Regards, Gordon

1 0

CoE -"Network Neutrality and Human Rights"
by Gordon Lennox 03 Jun '13

03 Jun '13

Last week the Council of Europe had a "multi-stakeholder dialogue on network neutrality and human rights". See: http://www.coe.int/t/informationsociety/ http://www.coe.int/t/informationsociety/NN%20Conf%202013/default_en.asp It was a good meeting. Some of the flavour can be had from Chris Marsden's opening presentation. http://www.slideshare.net/EXCCELessex/pre-history-of-european-network-neutr… A short outcomes paper of the major points of discussion is now being prepared which will, after participants comments, be communicated to the 47 member state representatives of the CoE Steering Committee on Media and Information Society (CDMSI) to consider and propose further action. Regards, Gordon

1 0

Change of representative of the European Commission
by Andrea.GLORIOSO＠ec.europa.eu 03 Jun '13

03 Jun '13

Dear all, I would like to let you know that following an internal restructuring within the "International relations" unit of DG CONNECT, the official "liaison" of the European Commission with the RIPE Cooperation Working Group will be - as of today - Mr Achilleas Kemos (in copy). A request to subscribe Mr Kemos to this mailing list has already been submitted this morning. Until the subscription becomes effective, thanks for keeping Mr Kemos in copy to further exchanges. Best regards, -- Andrea Glorioso (Mr) European Commission - DG Communication Networks, Content and Technology Unit D1 (International relations) + Task Force on Internet Policy Development Avenue de Beaulieu 25 (4/64) / B-1049 / Brussels / Belgium T: +32-2-29-97682 M: +32-460-797-682 E: Andrea.Glorioso(a)ec.europa.eu Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro The views expressed above are purely those of the writer and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission. Les opinions exprimées ci-dessus n'engagent que leur auteur et ne sauraient en aucun cas être assimilées à une position officielle de la Commission européenne. Be transparent - Sign up to the European Commission's Register of Interest Representatives http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regrin

1 0

Re: [cooperation-wg] Resignation as co-chair of he cooperation wg
by Michele Neylon :: Blacknight 29 May '13

29 May '13

Well it would be helpful to know who is actually in this group to start with Also I'd be wary of setting restrictions on who should / shouldn't be chair / co-chair, as participation levels in general are usually pretty low .. -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://mneylon.tel/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 ________________________________________ From: cooperation-wg-bounces(a)ripe.net [cooperation-wg-bounces(a)ripe.net] on behalf of Roland Perry [roland(a)perry.co.uk] Sent: 29 May 2013 15:18 To: cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net Subject: Re: [cooperation-wg] Resignation as co-chair of he cooperation wg In message <42C4053A-41B4-4CEA-B03A-EBA94A36729F(a)frobbit.se>, at 09:42:59 on Tue, 28 May 2013, Patrik Fältström <patrik(a)frobbit.se> remarked: >As some of you know I have in my move of jobs from Cisco to Netnod And Maria also moved jobs, so now's the time for the RIPE community to decide if this government/industry WG should be recruiting new talent. For the avoidance of doubt, this is not a criticism of Maria's move, nor her personal capabilities, but I think the WG should have a co-chair who is still on the government (ministry/regulator) side of the fence. People move jobs, they change their responsibilities; we should recognise that. -- Roland Perry

3 2

Resignation as co-chair of he cooperation wg
by Patrik Fältström 29 May '13

29 May '13

All, As some of you know I have in my move of jobs from Cisco to Netnod started to work much more operationally with Internet related issues. This includes many things covered by the cooperation wg, like immediate proposed legislative things. But this change have had impact on the amount of time I have on administrative issues, and the time I have I must primarily spend on my position as chair of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee of ICANN. This does not imply any kind of decrease in Netnod support of, and my participation in, RIPE processes, and I do notice explicitly you did like the coffee in the breaks in Dublin :-) I have mentioned this upcoming decision of mine to my co-chair Maria Häll, and also to the contact persons at RIPE NCC, so I hope they are not (too) surprised. So, you will still see me around, first with a report from me and Athina related to the proposed regulation that was presented and discussed in Dublin. I hope we will be ready early next week. Regards, Patrik

2 1

RIPE NCC Report on the ITU WTPF-13
by Chris Buckridge 27 May '13

27 May '13

[Apologies for duplicates] Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC has published a report on the recent ITU World Telecommunications/ICT Policy Forum (WTPF-13): https://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/news/ripe-ncc-report-on-the-itu-… Any comments or questions are welcome on the RIPE Cooperation Working Group mailing list: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/wg-lists/cooperation Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

1 0

Call for expressions of interest - Network and Information Security
by Gordon Lennox 21 May '13

21 May '13

The Commission will launch the Network and Information Security (NIS) Public-Private Platform on 17 June 2013. The output of the platform will feed into the Commission recommendations on cybersecurity across the value chain to be adopted in 2014. Interested stakeholders are invited to express their interest in participating in the platform before 24 May 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/nis-public-private-platform-–-ca…

3 3

My summary of discussion on COM(2012) 238/2
by Patrik Fältström 19 May '13

19 May '13

My summary of the discussion is positive, although when you read the below it sounds negative. Yes, I am worried personally about the proposed regulation, but that has been the case for months -- and increased worried I am after the meeting Thursday. I am though optimistic the question whether I should be worried, or no longer, can be resolved as many people said they will now help looking at the proposal. So yes, concerned, very concerned, but also happy finally discussion starts. So, discussions related to the proposed regulation COM(2012) 238/2 has started also in the organisations and areas which develop protocol and operational practices for the Internet. This happened previous week at the RIPE meeting that took place in Dublin. After some discussions with the EU Commission it was clear they could not participate on site, but on video. Quite irritating I must say that Commission that do issue (basis for) legislation that is quite specific without participating directly in the multi stakeholder discussions that exists on these topics. Last time I had this kind of discussion with COM it was related to the future of E.164 numbers in Europe. You can see a summary of the discussion including exchange of letters here: <http://stupid.domain.name/node/1459> Last time I find COM did participate actively on technical matters was when Per Blixt did come to a RIPE meeting and not only participated but also listened. Andrea Glorioso, Linda Corugedo Steneberg and others have participated in discussions related to Internet Governance of course, although as much in the RIPE community as elsewhere (ICANN, EuroDIG for example). So COM did not send a person this time either, but Andrea Servida that is one of the main persons related to the proposed regulation participated via a video conference. He presented and also responded to questions. Which of course was better than nothing. My view of the situation *before* the meeting you can find here <http://stupid.domain.name/node/1674>. You can find slides used for the cooperation working group here <https://ripe66.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/coop-wg/>. The ones interesting are the ones from Andrea Servida and the one from Patrik Fältström named "Article 5". At <https://ripe66.ripe.net/archives/#Thursday> you can see video, transcripts and more. In short, Andrea in my eyes confirmed the proposed regulation is not only about e-ID but much more general and related to all different kind of validation of who one communicate with. Not only e-ID but also "what web site one communicate with". This in turn to many in the room have impact on the models built for Internet at the moment using technologies like RPKI and DNSSEC which are directions there is broad consensus about. Due to the discussions RIPE NCC has decided to investigate whether it is true that the regulation MIGHT have impact on DNSSEC, RPKI or federated identity systems. The review will be done in a number of steps, all so that incremental results can be delivered as there is a lack of time regarding sending feedback to the European Parliament and Council where the proposal is currently discussed. Several country representatives (in a broad meaning), including SE, UK, DE and USA has contacted me and asked what my position is, and as a non-lawyer of course I can not say definitely. The good thing is that finally people do connect this proposed regulation with Internet. Something I claim COM has not done. Because the largest problem is once again that COM has developed a text without participating in the processes that exists for technical development. This implies people do not disagree with the over all problem statement, but to the proposed solution of the problem. When then objecting, it is as if one disagree with the problem existing. A summary of the situation is that the solution that is proposed is that in a combination of Brussels and Member States it is explicitly decided who are to be trust providers, and further that those trust providers must be trusted for various services that require among other things age, citizenship, residency and more (once again, according to Brussels/Member States). A different solution, which is more "modern" and also deployed, is that different systems do require different levels and kind of security. In some areas those are called "federations". Then for each such federation there is a combined certification and accreditation process by which the providers can be approved. Parties can then trust whoever they want as long as they have passed this audit. Decision of trust stays with whoever takes the risk. And here we have not started looking at the questions on the sovereignty member states of EU has in relationship with each other, and the built in contradiction between this and the interest in free movement of goods and services. Or the fact the proposed regulation define for example the following terms (as found by Gordon -- thanks): electronic identification; electronic identification means; electronic identification scheme; signatory; electronic signature; advanced electronic signature; qualified electronic signature; electronic signature creation data; certificate; qualified certificate for electronic signature; trust service; qualified trust service; trust service provider; qualified trust service provider; product; electronic signature creation device; qualified electronic signature creation device; creator of a seal; electronic seal; advanced electronic seal; qualified electronic seal; electronic seal creation data; qualified certificate for electronic seal; electronic time stamp; qualified electronic time stamp; electronic document; electronic delivery service (including proof of sending or receiving the data); qualified electronic deliver service; qualified certificate for website authentication; validation data. I have no idea whether anyone have checked the definition of these terms to see how they match or not match the general view in the world, and for example matches the definitions used in for example trade discussions between EU and USA, within OECD and/or WTO. Anyway, at last the discussion has started, and the first answers on the landscape should come from RIPE NCC that time should have read the document with a lawyers eyes. And we can know whether we should continue to be worried, or whether this is something that indeed is not impacting what is happening on the Internet. Patrik

1 0