[iot-wg] [IoT WG Focus]

Hi Peter!

I think that's a great idea!

Indeed, finding overlaps and ways to collaborate with other WGs was one of
the ideas of the survey. I had posted it to the RIPE general mailing list
as well but have only gotten very few responses from non-members (Btw... 11
responses from IoT WG members -- also not quite the quota I had hoped we'd
be looking at...).

In the back of my head, opportunities to work together are still best
discussed in person over beverages, but I'd be happy to see IoT WG members
sharing the link on other WG lists to get some more feedback before RIPE 82
(and thus, possibly more ideas to be discussed in the slot Sandoche and I
saved for the results in the session agenda)!

Cheers!
Constanze


>
>
> *Von: *Peter Steinhäuser <ps at embedd.com>
>
> *Betreff: Aw: [iot-wg] [IoT WG Focus]*
>
> *Datum: *23. April 2021 um 15:49:50 MESZ
>
> *An: *sandoche Balakrichenan <sandoche.balakrichenan at afnic.fr>
>
> *Kopie: *IoT WG RIPE <iot-wg at ripe.net>
>
>
>
> Dear Sandoche,
>
>
>
> I am totally on your page on keeping the charter wide - it was not my
> intention to open an discussion about this.
>
>
>
> Nevertheless to find out topics of interest for the group we also could
> think about asking other WGs about sharing the survey to gather more
> feedback (?)
>
>
>
> - Peter
>
>
>
> Am 22.04.2021 um 16:36 schrieb sandoche Balakrichenan <
> sandoche.balakrichenan at afnic.fr>:
>
>
>
> Dear Peter,
>
> I completely agree with your views that the WG is not as active.
>
> The charter scope was the line of discussion, when the WG was formed :
> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/iot-wg/2017-November/subject.html#226
>
> With Constanze, we have discussed means to identify the the WG members
> requirements. Constanze had even sent a survey in this objective:
> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdVVq38C96Mn_Lv8eDgiHGzt3TgzPfx_MMQ4iMiORnM2zWBYg/viewform
>
> IMHO, we will keep the scope for the charter wide, but if there are
> activities focusing on a particular domain, it is always positive.
>
> Sandoche.
>
>
>
> On 22/04/2021 14:34, Peter Steinhäuser wrote:
>
> Dear collegues,
>
>
>
> since this working group was founded I feel that it never really got
> traction and struggled a bit to find it’s place in the RIPE community. Also
> there is not much activity, despite the working group's chair’s and some
> member’s efforts (hackathons, BCOP document, survey) to motivate WG members
> to participate more actively.
>
>
>
> The WG’s charter covers a huge field of possible activities around IoT
> while (to me it seems) other WG’s have more focus. I may be wrong but I
> think that this lack of focus makes it more difficult for this WG to
> organize joint activities. The majority of the activities of the
> (technical) RIPE WG’s are centered around IP and IP based networks
> therefore I think focusing on similar areas could help this WG to become a
> more lively part of the RIPE community.
>
>
>
> An example could be analysis and research around the thread protocol of
> the Project Connected Home over IP of the ZigBee Alliance. Based upon IPv6
> and with products from major players already shipping this could be one
> possible field of activity that connects with other WG’s areas of expertise.
>
>
>
> I would be glad to hear your opinions!
>
>
>
> Thanks and best regards,
>
> Peter
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> iot-wg mailing list
>
> iot-wg at ripe.net
>
> https://mailman.ripe.net/
>
> --
>
> Sandoche BALAKRICHENAN
>
> Head of R&D Partnerships @ Afnic
>
> LoRaWAN Academia WG Chair & RIPE IoT WG Co-Chair
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> iot-wg mailing list
> iot-wg at ripe.net
> https://mailman.ripe.net/
>
>
>
>
>
> *Peter Steinhäuser, CEO*
> embeDD GmbH · Alter Postplatz 2 · 6370 Stans · Switzerland
> Phone: +41 (41) 784 95 85 · Fax: +41 (41) 784 95 64
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/iot-wg/attachments/20210423/c4bb746a/attachment-0001.html>