IoT Working Group Minutes RIPE 90
Date: Wednesday, 14 May 2025 11:00-12:30 (UTC+1)
Co-Chairs: Peter Steinhäuser, Peter Wehrle
Scribe: Robert Kisteleki
Status: Draft
View the stenography transcripts
A. Introduction & Housekeeping [5 min]
The presentation is available at:
https://ripe90.ripe.net/archives/video/1617/
B. Policy Certification and Verification for Cybersecurity in the IoT [30 min]
Dr. Anna Maria Mandalari, Imperial College London
The presentation is available at:
https://ripe90.ripe.net/archives/video/1618/
Alistair Woodman of NetDEF said he believed the situation was not necessarily as bad as it has been described; multiple institutions were working in this space (e.g. ETSI). There was work to be done in selecting appropriate standards for this, as there probably was not enough time to create new standards. Also, policy enforcement was going to be a real issue. Anna Maria Mandalari agreed and said she had highlighted this challenge as well.
Niall O’Reilly, RIPE Vice-Chair, asked if the creation of some kind of BCP document could help here. Anna said a draft would be useful. Niall asked if there could be a container of some sorts in his router to do the gateway functionality she described. Anna said there probably was, but it would need resources.
C. Detecting Attacks using Honeypot Data from AIDE [15 min]
Yuanyuan Zhou, Imperial College London
The presentation is available at: https://ripe90.ripe.net/archives/video/1620/
There were no questions.
D. Towards Operational and Security Best Practices for DNS in the Internet of Things [15 min]
Abhishek Mishra, Inria, France
The presentation is available at: https://ripe90.ripe.net/archives/video/1622/
Michael Richardson of Sandelman CA mentioned RFC 9726 had been published in this area. The IETF IOTOPS Working Group had been rechartered, and he said Abhishek’s work would be welcome there. He understood some devices Abhishek had described used DoH only as a fallback.
Sam Cheadle of ICANN asked if the characteristics were more predictive for IoT devices as compared to conventional network devices. Abhishek Mishra said these queries were quite unique to IoT devices.
E. State of Device Identities [10 min]
Michael Richardson, Sandelman CA
The presentation is available at:
https://ripe90.ripe.net/archives/video/1624/
Abhishek Mishra asked for clarification on what a device identity really was. Michael explained the difference between the two uses of this notion: one was for the type of device, and the other for identifying the device operationally.
Niel O’Reilly asked if YANG was relevant here. Michael answered that for devices that were manageable by YANG, it could be. However, it was unlikely to have such a device in a home. This really depended on how the device management was designed.
Rüdiger Volk said he found the “no management” idea surprising and pointed to SNMP-managed devices. Michael said YANG in a managed environment was more likely, but it was less likely in the home.
F. IoT WG Chair Selection
The presentation is available at:
https://ripe90.ripe.net/archives/video/1625/
Peter Wehrle’s term as co-chair ended at RIPE 90. Anna Maria Mandalari volunteered to be co-chair and got strong support from the working group.