This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[iot-wg] Proposed Updates to EU RED Directive to increase IoT security
- Previous message (by thread): [iot-wg] Proposed Updates to EU RED Directive to increase IoT security
- Next message (by thread): [iot-wg] For information: ETSI releases IoT security standard
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Thu Feb 14 16:32:34 CET 2019
On 14 Feb 2019, at 15:03, Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13 at gmail.com> wrote: > > There have been attempts in the past in somewhat similar circumstances to coordinate and submit RIPE community feedback. If the WG can reach a consensus position on the revised directive, I’d be happy to submit that to the EU Commission if that’s what the WG wants. Given the deadline, delivering a consensus statement from the WG would seem to be the most achievable result. And even that might be too ambitious. Though it would be nice to be proved wrong. A consensus statement from the RIPE community looks unrealistic IMO. We’d need to allow at least a week or so for discussion on the ripe list and hope that it converged on consensus. That discussion couldn't get under way before this WG has arrived a consensus => reaching agreement by the end of next week or theresabouts. All that’s do-able but the timelines are very, very tight. So here are my questions. Does the WG want to provide feedback? If the answer is yes, what should that feedback say? Over to all of you...
- Previous message (by thread): [iot-wg] Proposed Updates to EU RED Directive to increase IoT security
- Next message (by thread): [iot-wg] For information: ETSI releases IoT security standard
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ iot-wg Archives ]