[iot-wg] To be published: Architectural Considerations for IoT Device Security in the Home
- Previous message (by thread): [iot-wg] To be published: Architectural Considerations for IoT Device Security in the Home
- Next message (by thread): [iot-wg] To be published: Architectural Considerations for IoT Device Security in the Home
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Eliot Lear
lear at lear.ch
Fri Feb 12 15:40:55 CET 2021
Hi Töma And it is phrased slightly awkwardly. How about this: "Comparing internet layer and layer four information to known deny-lists ("blocklists")" and "Validating that the internet layer and layer four information matches an associated MUD profile" ? Eliot On 12.02.21 14:42, Töma Gavrichenkov wrote: > Peace, > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2021, 3:56 PM Constanze Dietrich > <constanze.die at gmail.com <mailto:constanze.die at gmail.com>> wrote: > > Since RIPE 81, the "BCOP" document was refined again and now > declared DONE under the title: "Architectural Considerations for > IoT Device Security in the Home" (document attached). > > > Section 4 sort of implies that there are only two Layer 4 protocols. > It'd be very nice if the final RIPE document doesn't have such > implications. > > -- > Töma > > > _______________________________________________ > iot-wg mailing list > iot-wg at ripe.net > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/iot-wg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/iot-wg/attachments/20210212/329bc98c/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [iot-wg] To be published: Architectural Considerations for IoT Device Security in the Home
- Next message (by thread): [iot-wg] To be published: Architectural Considerations for IoT Device Security in the Home
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ iot-wg Archives ]