Time

Agenda Item

Lead

Notes

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:

--

Announcements

All

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 min

Review of previous action items

Chairs

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:

• TAS GitHub Markdown version

• TAS GitHub issues list

• TAS Source Diagrams (Google Slides) <== SOURCE DIAGRAMS used in the TAS

• ToIP Protocol Stack Diagrams (Google Slides) <== All of all our past diagrams (some of which have been copied to TAS Source Diagrams)

• TAS WORKING DRAFT 03 Google doc version <== REFERENCE ONLY — NO LONGER ACTIVE

• TAS OLD WORKING DRAFT 02 Google Doc version <== REFERENCE ONLY — NO LONGER ACTIVE

• Evolution of the ToIP Stack <== NEW proposed companion document

• TATF Google Drive Folder <== WHERE ALL OF THE ABOVE may be found

5 mins

Start of Trust Registry TF

@Darrell 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 mins

Github 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 mins

Github 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 mins

Github Contributor License Agreement (CLA) process

@Elisa 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 mins

Review issue priority

@Drummond Reed 

We did a quick survey of the issues list to focus down on the most important ones that remain.

10 mins

Issue 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 min

TAS 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 mins

IIW session prep

All

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