Versions Compared

Old Version 7

changes.mady.by.user Drummond Reed

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Jo Spencer

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Meeting Date & Time

  •   This Task Force holds TWO meetings weekly every Thursday at the following times (to cover global time zones - see the Calendar of ToIP Meetings):
    • NA/EU 07:00-8:00 PT / 14:00-15:00 UTC 
    • APAC 18:00-19:00 PT / 01:00-02:00 UTC

Zoom Meeting

...

Recordings

Attendees

NA/EU Meeting

APAC Meeting

Main Goals of this Meeting

...

TimeAgenda ItemLeadNotes
3 min
  • Start recording
  • Welcome & antitrust notice
  • Introduction of new members
  • Agenda review
Chairs
  • Antitrust Policy Notice: Attendees are reminded to adhere to the meeting agenda and not participate in activities prohibited under antitrust and competition laws. Only members of ToIP who have signed the necessary agreements are permitted to participate in this activity beyond an observer role.
  • New Members:
--AnnouncementsAll

Updates of general interest to TATF members:

  • Reminder that today at 11:00-12:00 PT / 18:00-19:00 UTC Drummond Reed and Wenjing Chu will give a high-level overview of the TAS to the Governance Stack WG. See the ToIP Calendar for meeting details.
2 minReview of previous action itemsChairs
  •  ACTION: Drummond Reed to ask Elisa Trevino turn on the Discussions feature in our Github repo.
  •  ACTION: Drummond Reed to update the GitHub Issues Management wiki page to include: a) this revised list of labels, b) a table explaining how each label ties into the process, c) more detail about the Editor role, including managing issue assignments, d) the Maintainer role. DONE.
  •  ACTION: Andor volunteered to implement the set of labels in issue #37. DONE.
  •  ACTION:  Christine Martin and/or Drummond Reed to create an #tswg-tech-arch-editors channel on Slack. DONE.
  •  ACTION: Editors to come up with a list of proposed permissions and work with Elisa Trevino to assign the necessary access rights.
  •  ACTION: Antti Kettunen volunteered to propose a repo management process. DONE.
  •  ACTION: Drummond Reed to collect his thoughts on issue #31 and add a comment.
  •  ACTION: Drummond Reed to post a message to the #tswg-tech-arch-tf channel urging all TF members to being self-assigning and working issues.

ToIP Technology Architecture Specification Review Topics

Discussion of progress on the working draft of the ToIP Technology Architecture Specification (TAS). Links to relevant documents and diagrams:

5 minsStart of Trust Registry TFDarrell O'Donnell 

Report on the startup of this TF and using this same meeting slot for weekly meetings.

This was postponed to next week's meeting due to the size of today's agenda.

5 minsGithub issues process

Drummond Reed 

Issue #47 — GitHub issue labeling

Drummond explained that the process defined on this wiki page has now been applied to categorize, prioritize, and assign our current issues.

5 minsGithub PR process updates

Antti Kettunen 

Andor

Issues #40, #46 & #49 — Roles, PR and version publication process 

Antti presented these slides.

APAC:

  • Neil Thomson asked if contributors actually needed to have a local Github instance.
  • Drummond was pretty sure the answer was no; it can be done entirely on the web.
  • Neil put a comment one of the issues above to find out for sure.

ACTION: If you have any feedback on issues #40, #46 & #49 — roles, pull requests (PRs) and the version publication process — please go in and comment. If you have any questions, ask them in the #tswg-tech-arch-tf Slack channel.

5 minsGithub Contributor License Agreement (CLA) processElisa Trevino 

Elisa ran us through the procedure in this Google doc.   

It is critical that all of the Editors and Contributors to the TAS go through this process ASAP.

ACTION: ALL TATF members need to read the EasyCLA process document and decide on the CLA manager assignment for your organization in order to continue to make contributions to the TAS. You can also set it up to provide wildcard support for all representatives of your org (based on your email domain). See Elisa Trevino for access/help.

15 minsReview issue priorityDrummond Reed Quick We did a quick survey of the issues list to adjust priority: tags as neededfocus down on the most important ones that remain.
10 minsIssue 31: Figure 4 — The 4 Layer Diagram

Drummond Reed Wenjing Chu thomsona 
Jo Spencer 
Darrell O'Donnell

<== These five have been assigned issue #31.

Per his action item (above), Drummond posted a proposed solution.

NA/EU Meeting:

  • We reviewed the main points of the issue #31 thread in a good half-hour discussion.
  • There was general agreement with the main points in the thread — that Layer 2s and 3 are clearly a protocol stack, but Layer 1 is more challenging because it is not a protocol, rather a set of interfaces to the trust support functions needed to support Layer 2.
  • Wenjing pointed out that this diagram is "overloaded" since it is not an overall architectural diagram, rather it only shows the protocol stack within a single Endpoint System.
  • There was consensus that a diagram appearing this early in the document could be simpler and lighter, and that a more comprehensive "full stack" diagram could be included at the end of the document.

ACTION: Darrell O'Donnell to propose another variant of Figure 4 as a candidate for the "full stack" diagram discussed in issue #31. DONE.

ACTION: thomsona to propose a simpler diagram to replace the current Figure 4 in section 6.2 as discussed in issue #31.

APAC Meeting:

  • Drummond reported that Darrell had already completed his action item above. Drummond then did a little further editing to produce diagram #1 (see below).
  • Jo Spencer suggested to use the term "services" rather than "interfaces" to make it clearer that those Layer 1 services could be local or remote, which is why the three boxes "straddle the fence) of the bottom of Layer 1. At the same time, that makes it less clear what exactly the borders are on the "sphere of influence" of the ToIP stack, i.e., interoperability that we govern vs. what is governed by others.

ACTION: Jo Spencer to noodle on some diagrams that more clearly define the borders of the "sphere of influence" of the ToIP stack.

5 minTAS public review blog post

Drummond Reed Wenjing Chu 

We want to publish a ToIP blog post on Monday November 14 announcing release of the Public Review Draft of the TAS.

ACTION: Drummond Reed to begin a draft of a blog post announcing release of the Public Review Draft of the TAS.

5 minsIIW session prepAll

Proposals:

  1. Wenjing Chu to host a session reviewing the TAS.
  2. Drummond Reed to host a session on the ToIP Trust Spanning Protocol requirements.
  3. Sam Smith to host a session on the Authentic Web.
--
  • Review decisions/action items
  • Planning for next meeting 
Chairs

Screenshots/Diagrams (numbered for reference in notes above)

#1

Image Added

Decisions

  • Sample Decision ItemNone.

Action Items

  •  ACTION: If you have any feedback on issues #40, #46 & #49 — roles, pull requests (PRs) and the version publication process — please go in and comment. If you have any questions, ask them in the #tswg-tech-arch-tf Slack channel.
  •  ACTION: ALL TATF members need to read the EasyCLA process document and decide on the CLA manager assignment for your organization in order to continue to make contributions to the TAS. You can also set it up to provide wildcard support for all representatives of your org (based on your email domain). See Elisa Trevino for access/help.
  •  

    ACTION: Darrell O'Donnell to propose another variant of Figure 4 as a candidate for the "full stack" diagram discussed in issue #31. DONE.

  •  

    ACTION: thomsona to propose a simpler diagram to replace the current Figure 4 in section 6.2 as discussed in issue #31.

  •  ACTION: Jo Spencer to noodle on some diagrams that more clearly define the borders of the "sphere of influence" of the ToIP stack.
  •  ACTION: Drummond Reed to begin a draft of a blog post announcing release of the Public Review Draft of the TAS.