- iot-wg - mailman.ripe.net

[iot-discussion] Subject: Mailing list name change: iot-wg@ripe.net
by Marco Hogewoning 06 Nov '17

06 Nov '17

Dear colleagues, Following the establishment of the RIPE IoT Working Group during the RIPE 75 meeting in Dubai, we are planning to change the name of this mailing list to iot-wg(a)ripe.net. If you wish to remain subscribed to this list, no action is required. On Tuesday, 7 November 2017, we will discontinue the current iot-discussion mailing list and transfer your subscription and settings to the new RIPE IoT Working Group list: iot-wg(a)ripe.net. From that point onwards, please send any emails to iot-wg(a)ripe.net, as the current address will no longer be functional. If you no longer wish to participate in the discussion, prior to the migration you can manage your settings and unsubscribe via: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/iot-discussion We will send an announcement, including a pointer to the new management interface, once the migration has been completed. Regards, Marco Hogewoning RIPE NCC

1 0

[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