/
2020-11-30 Weekly Meeting

2020-11-30 Weekly Meeting

Dec 02, 2020

30 November 2020  — 8AM PT, 11AM ET, 16:00 UK, 17:00 CET

Send an email to technical-stack-wg@lists.trustoverip.org to request a calendar invite (you can subscribe to the mailing list at lists.trustoverip.org).

Attendees

@David Luchuk (Deactivated)

@Philip Feairheller, Scoir, Inc. <phil@scoir.com>

@Steven Milstein

@Drummond Reed

@Stephen Curran

@Christoph Schneider

@Steve McCown

@luca boldrin

 

APAC 2020-12-02 (No Recording)

@David Luchuk (Deactivated)

@Vinod Panicker

@Amar Tumballi

Eric Drury

 

 

 

Recording (North America / Europe)

Recording (APAC) - n/a

Goals

  • Assign action items for next meeting

  • Establish work plan for WG deliverables and ensure action items have owners

  • Gather agenda suggestions for next meeting

Agenda Items

Time

Item

Who

Notes

Time

Item

Who

Notes

1 min

Welcome

D. Luchuk

 

2 mins

Antitrust Policy Notice

D. Luchuk

 

2 mins

New Introductions

D. Luchuk

  • None

2 mins

Minutes from last meeting (16-Nov-2020)

D. Luchuk

  • Approval: By Consensus

5 mins

Announcements - review

D. Luchuk

 

5 mins

Proposed Taskforce - Verifiable Authorizations

TBC

 

10 mins

L1 Interop Spec

P. Feairheller

 

15 mins

Task Force SOS (Scrum of Scrums)

TF Leads

 

5 mins

Discussion Topics

All

 

5 mins

Review Action and Open Items

All

 

Announcements 

Reminders - revisiting items from Nov 16 meeting
Education Meetings
Planned: None
Call for Education Sessions
KERI Protocol to be revisited (open item)
DIF Interop WG Interlock - Arch Map

Taskforce - Verifiable Authorizations

Review previous suggestion and discuss TF set-up
Sam Smith was not able to attend, so we did not discuss this proposed TF further
Drummond noted that this thread was ongoing in the GitHub for the W3C Verifiable Credentials Data Model 1.0 spec, and that it was highly relevant to this proposed TF

Layer 1 Interop Spec

@Philip Feairheller explained the open questions about this spec:

  1. Should we have separate specs/APIs for DID resolution (reads) and DID registration (writes).

    1. @Stephen Curran suggested that yes, it would be best to separate reading, which may often be across DID methods, and writing, which is likely to be specific to writing to a "home network".

  2. Should we have a separate spec for DID network discovery?

    1. @Stephen Curran also felt this would be helpful because decentralized discovery is already a topic on the Indy DID Method Spec WG.

    2. @Philip Feairheller agreed that could be very helpful to be able to do "trusted discovery".

  3. Do we need separate specs/APIs for schema discovery?

    1. @Stephen Curran felt that this could be more complicated. The goal of the Indy DID method spec is to make access to all these ledger objects based on DID resolution. So to retrieve the object, you would simply resolve the DID. 

    2. @Philip Feairheller asked whether this would also apply to revocation registries.

    3. @Stephen Curran felt yes, that would also be the best way to access that info.

  4. @Drummond Reed agreed with all the comments above and strongly endorsed using DID resolution and registration as the primary mechanism we should rely for abstraction of Layer 1.

  5. We then discussed what should be specified by DID method specifications and what should be specified by our ToIP Layer 1 specs.

    1. @Drummond Reed spoke to the need for the ToIP Layer 1 specs to provide as much guidance as possible to DID method specification authors about interop

    2. This includes defining DID document type for common Layer 1 objects like schemas and revocation registries.

    3. @Philip Feairheller agreed, and will take this into account in the specs

Task Force SOS (Scrum of Scrums)

TF Name

Mission

Members

Status

TF Name

Mission

Members

Status

Privacy by Design

Submit a ToIP Design Principles Deliverable.

@Jim StClair (lead) 

@Drummond Reed@Dan Gisolfi

@John Phillips

 

DUE 30-Sep-20 – OVERDUE and a dependency for Saturn-V proposal. 

All parties where introduced to the task at hand but no meetings held to complete them.

Need to get EU (Jasmin and Johannes) engaged ASAP.

@Jim StClair has submitted a proposal.

Laws of Identity

Submit a ToIP Design Principles Deliverable.

@Darrell O'Donnell  

@Dan Gisolfi

@Victor Syntez

Need a lead for this TF. 

Two issues (#15 and #16) opened against DRAFT recommendation.

We need more help getting this work-product completed. 

DUE 30-Sep-20 – OVERDUE and a dependency for Saturn-V proposal. 

How do we map the Laws of Identity to the various Layers in Trust Over IP Foundation Stack?

@Drummond Reed reported that @Victor Syntez has been doing work on these design principles.

Saturn-V TIP Task Force

Submit a TIP Recommendation  Deliverable.

@Dan Gisolfi   (lead) 

@Philip Feairheller

@Kevin Griffin

Need volunteers in support of this TIP to participate in the Task Force.

Update Saturn V Proposal to reflect new Design Principles from associated TFs. Proposal placed on hold; A Draft Guide for Design Principles has been ready since late September. We are still pending Design Principles for the following: Laws of Identity and Privacy by Design efforts.

KanBan Boards and process setup for Aries Vendor Interop Testing. 

@Stephen Curran reported that the Hyperledger Aries WG is working on the Aries Interop Profile V2. That meeting is at noon PT on Wednesdays.

TSWG Deliverables and Process Task Force

Define and communicate to ToIP SC our deliverables and process. 

@Dan Gisolfi (lead) 

@Drummond Reed @Darrell O'Donnell

Needs to update current deck with suggestions for Use Cases Model for TSWG. Collaborate with @David Luchuk (Deactivated)and the Operational Team on how to communicate this info. 

  • Need to discuss Issue #1 - TIP Repo Template Contents

  • OVERDUE: Overall Operational Team process definition delays preventing focus on interlock with TIP and Spec deliverables processes. 

  • @Drummond Reed reported that @Daniel Hardman gave an extended presentation to the Concepts and Terminology WG last Monday that went into great depth about the proposed tooling that can also handle permalinks. Everyone is enthusiastic about this design but it needs more work.

TSWG Glossary

Collaborate with CTWG on the process and delivery of a TSWG Glossary. 

@RJ Reiser  (lead) 

  • Terminology: All terminology suggestions should be submitted as Issues to the Concepts and Terminology WG Repo or via alternative CTWG processes. 

  • Exploring tools and process for submitting/publishing terms. 

  • CTWG is considering a perma-link service for all authors to leverage.

.

RFC 289 Conversion 

Submit a ToIP Specification Deliverable

@Drummond Reed (lead) 

@Dan Gisolfi @Darrell O'Donnell

Factored into new joint deliverables proposal that consists of five pieces:

  1. Technical Architecture TSS

  2. Technology Stack Design Principles

  3. Governance Architecture TSS

  4. Governance Stack Design Principles

  5. Design and Architecture of the ToIP Stack white paper

Layer 1 Interop Spec (LIS 1)

Submit a ToIP Specification Deliverable 

@Kevin Griffin  (lead) 

@Drummond Reed @Darrell O'Donnell @Philip Feairheller

Working on a deliverable plan. Spec writing Tool selection underway. Spec outline concepts proposed. 

Layer 2 Interop Spec (LIS 2)

Submit a ToIP Specification Deliverable

@Dave McKay (lead) 

@Scott Whitmire

@Rob Bartlett

Working on a deliverable plan. Pending closure and guidance on KanBan Boards and Deliverables process. 

Layer 3 Interop Spec (LIS 3)

Submit a ToIP Specification Deliverable

@Dave McKay (lead)

@Scott Whitmire

@Rob Bartlett

Working on a deliverable plan. Pending closure and guidance on KanBan Boards and Deliverables process. 

Decentralization Task Force

Submit a ToIP Recommendation as a Design Principle.

@Daniel Bachenheimer  (lead)

Jessica Townsend

TBD

Decision Points

None

Discussion Topics (carry-over from Nov 16 meeting)

GSWG Proposal: Q1 2021 Joint Deliverables Package

Sam Smith - Task Force Proposal for next meeting
Verifiable Authorizations: Mapping vCreds spec to authorization semantics. Positioning this concept with respect to other industry activity. 
Migration to Kanban tooling. 

Trello Account Setup; Board creation WIP. 
Goal is to improve WG reporting (scrum activity) and allow Task Forces to organize and manage activity.
Upon completion of KanBan boards: Convert TSWG Bi-monthy Meeting into a Monthly Scrum of Scrums (SOS); Allowing TFs to meet more frequently and to be more focused on actual deliverables than status updates.

Action items

Each TF is requested to prepare a TF plan with target dates. 
All TSWG Members should read our Deliverable Process and TIP Lifecycle Management; Open issues where appropriate. 
Set Agenda for next meeting
APAC call (Dec 2, 2020) - @David Luchuk (Deactivated) to 1) send message seeking input from TSWG US/EU on requirements for Utility project underway in APAC region, and 2) propose that TSWG & UFWG meetings for APAC region be merged.

Open Items

Low priority items that failed to gain volunteers to champion cause.

Change TSWG Mtg slot.
ISO Interlock discussion : ToIP Liaison (Vicky Lemieux) to ISO TC 307 (Emily Dawson Secretariat)
Need to establish chair duration and cycle times
Possible library - collection of links