Time

Agenda Item

Lead

Notes

5 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:

5 min

Review of previous action items

Chairs

• Concepts & Terminology tools & guides to be included in TRTF work 

  • @Drummond Reed | @Neil Thomson : Proceeding development of tools. Tools need another 2 months.

    • Terminology toolbox. Required for final glossary but terms wiki can happen in parallel. 

    • Require a mental model : Picture or diagram that shows how the group of terms relate and helps make terms clear. @Drummond Reed added an example (screenshot #1 below) from this eSSIF-Labs Glossary page.

    • @Neil Thomson TR: simple lookup list. Complexity comes in proving the trust.  

    • Related Chat:

      • @Scott Perry Mental models are not a trivial task to build.  If this is a core requirement, we need a drafting session.  Unless we have Rieks do them for every group.

      • @Tim Bouma :

        • DNS: Name Lookup
          Trust Registry: Authority Lookup

      • @Darrell O'Donnell : authenticity/provenance chain - to me that’s a post v2 capability. It’s helpful to back up the basic answers, but not required. Further for many systems it would be a blocker.

      • @Vladimir Simjanoski +1 for mental model. not defining it explicitly doesn't mean we don't have one when designing the underlying spec / API. getting it right is difficult, though (agreed with Scott)

      • @Neil Thomson @ Darrell - agreed on post v2. However, how do we gradually incorporate governance with that goal in mind. Separate discussion - will bring up in Gov Stack WG.

      • @Darrell O'Donnell : 

      • @Neil - I think we can get there relatively easily. When you ask “is this an Authoritative Issuer of credential type X, under EGF Y?” you may be able to ask “and how do you do this?”

        The answer for many will be “because I am the authority” but for some it would be “see this chain of provenance”.

      • Over time I believe systems will prefer one or the other path. Less formal ecosystems will likely stay light, while more formal/regulated ecosystems would lean towards authentic provenance.

20 mins

Recap of discussions from previous meetings. 

Chairs

Chairs will lead discussion on recapping & reviewing the various discussions happening in the TF meetings and Github discussions.
This includes recap on Trust Registry component & Trust Task model.

Review: 

• Relevant TR Lead Stuff:

  • https://github.com/trustoverip/tswg-trust-registry-tf/discussions/68#discussioncomment-4919723

  • Leaders got together to make sure alignment.

    • @Antti Kettunen descriptive work of what TR work looks like today.

    • @Darrell O'Donnell discussed his concept of the TR framework as a way for governance and technical stacks to align across all 4 layers of the ToIP stack

    • @Andor and @Antti Kettunen : How do you build the context for a decision?

    • https://github.com/trustoverip/tswg-trust-registry-tf/discussions/68#discussioncomment-4919723

  • @Jacques: https://www.cira.ca/cira-dnssec-practice-statement-ca

•  Define TRTF Deliverables for V2 #61

  • Daniel Hardman: Drew a distinction between Layer 2 and Layer 3, as  relationship oriented vs. task oriented, respectively. Defined the scope of a TR: "Is this piece of evidence grounded in conventions and entities that I consider trustworthy?"

15 mins

 Trust Registry Canada Work Review

@mathieu 

5 mins

• Review decisions/action items

• Planning for next meeting 

Chairs