Dear all, Please find on the Members Platform the minutes of this week's PRC - see https://membersplatform.gaia-x.eu/dashboard#/download?path=https://memberspl... Best regards, Giuditta Giuditta Del Buono | Technical Product Manager Gaia-X European Association for Data and Cloud AISBL Phone: +39 339 7279869 giuditta.delbuono@gaia-x.eumailto:cosmina.gantner@gaia-x.eu | www.gaia-x.euhttps://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http*3A*2F*2Fwww.gaia-x.eu*2F&data=04*7C01*7CDenisa.maki*40sitra.fi*7Cd956c12164d5412ca89508d96e250ff8*7Cb01220f1ab94493686d7f3b40f38f4b7*7C0*7C0*7C637661927885622462*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C1000&sdata=efrGblwfgZ9qbqMdnKa4Zm*2Bu*2BidNESotjnZUHTNRp20*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!dSzaCjlr_mXtzI4ft0CvrYRBfZ4s6oFUEOb7BOQ7fyIyuP9xM5k4g_c6a3uZbziTnGps$ Avenue des Arts 6-9 1210 Bruxelles/Brussels Belgium [cid:image001.png@01D9B63B.324A34F0]https://gaia-x.eu/ PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: For details about what personal information we collect and why, please see our Privacy Policy on our website at http://www.gaia-x.eu/privacy-policy. This e-mail message and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. Any unauthorized use or disclosure, copying and/or distribution of the content of this e-mail message and attachments is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and attachments immediately. Thank you. Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. Save about 200ml water, 2g CO2, 0.05kWh power, and 2g wood.
Dear PRC colleagues,
Two suggested topics for the PRC agenda today.
Topic 1: optionality of labels
We have disagreement in the PRD WG about the following Merge Request. Left is current text in PRLD, right is change proposal authored by DT (Valentin/Jakob).
The essence is whether Labels are optional for every user, or only optional outside Europe. The WG proposes to bring this to the Board for final decision making.
[A close up of a screen Description automatically generated]
Topic 2: data space criteria
Pierre continues to push for data space requirements to be added to PRLD, to make a meaningful demo at the next summit, to make “data space compliance” with Gaia-X specific and clear. I know in last PRC we deprioritized that for later, but I admit I have sympathy for this push by Pierre, the data exchange WG and some of the lighthouse initiatives who search for a meaningful set of compliance criteria. A meaningful MR is now proposed (MR!119).
I propose to not close the door for these developments, and my compromise proposal is to ask for a production-ready release of the cloud infrastructure criteria (conformance and L1) and a demo-ready release of the data space criteria. In that case we could adopt the data space criteria into PRLD as works-in-progress, and in preparation for a public consultation on these in the fall.
Regards,
Bert
From: Giuditta del Buono
Hi Bert,
Hi all,
-CC of WG lists and individuals, as the PRC list should cover all of us, already, and I consider the "Dear PRC Colleagues" as indication you just wanted to address the PRC.
thank you for your message.
For me both topics affect the timeline to be agreed upon. Is there already any proposal?
Re Topic 2:
I agree, we should not close doors unnecessarily. In regards of a suitable MR!119 I disagree.
The section still mixes up the target of evaluation. The section still lacks the defined pain points or benefits which it will resolve. Subsequent this week's Monthly with Lighthouses (to my understanding) their interest is mere technical - policy related rules they consider burdensome and two farfetched because currently the technical fundament is missing, the real-life operations are lacking, and therefore, legal / policy related matters were not ready for discussions. So, if the Lighthouses indicate they are not primarily interested in policy criteria, why are we developing those?
Nonetheless: what PRC / Gaia-X needs to discuss is - how to address the turnaround in public communications. Previously, "Gaia-X Compliance" (which now includes Gaia-X Conformity), was two-fold: technical compliance and policy compliance. Both streams were independent, and Lighthouses were - supported by Gaia-X - communicating their "Gaia-X Compliance" (addressing the technical perspective). The shift of terminology to policy rules will require the Lighthouses to refrain from such a statement, now, which is quite negative from a communications perspective. All the work in regards Compliance / Conformity has been done under the headline "sorting out confusing terminology". Nonetheless, we need to discuss to what extent we can enable Lighthouses to remain some positive language.
Best,
Frank
--
Frank Ingenrieth, LL.M.
Geschäftsführer / Managing Director
[cid:image003.png@01D9BA36.F879EA40]
Selbstregulierung Informationswirtschaft e.V.
SRIW
[Markierung]
Großbeerenstraße 88
10963 Berlin
[Telefon]
+49-30-30878099-2
[E-Mail]
fingenrieth@sriw.demailto:fingenrieth@sriw.de
[Internet]
https://sriw.dehttps://sriw.de/
[cid:image008.png@01D9BA36.F879EA40]https://twitter.com/SRIW_eV
[cid:image009.png@01D9BA36.F879EA40]https://www.linkedin.com/company/sriw
@SRIW_eVhttps://twitter.com/SRIW_eV
Selbstregulierunghttps://www.linkedin.com/company/scope-europe Informationswirtschaft
From: Bert Verdonck
Dear Bert, all,
thanks, just to clarify on topic 1: we are not proposing to make all Labels compulsory. On the contrary, we are asking not to change the existing approach for the EU, in line with the PRD document from November last year. In the PRD, we have always referenced levels 1-3 for cloud services offered in the EU/EEA - whereas level 1 is the starting point for conformity with the Gaia-X policy rules and not optional.
What has been changed in fact is the introduction of a 'basic conformity' level which has effectively lowered the entry point for Gaia-X compliant services in the EU, from level 1 to BC. We do not agree with this change. At least when it comes to service offerings within the EU, we do not see a reason to introduce BC and make level 1 optional. To be clear: levels 2 and 3 will of course remain optional, we are not proposing anything against that - it will be the choice of the service providers which level they want to attain.
Talk later, best Jakob
Von: Bert Verdonck
participants (4)
-
Bert Verdonck -
Frank Ingenrieth -
Giuditta del Buono -
Jakob.Greiner＠telekom.de