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:

1 min

Reminder - TSWG2 Mailing List

Chairs

Reminder that the Technology Stack Working Group has a new mailing list. You need to join this as it involves the new charter that TSWG is operating under. You can do that here:

• https://lists.trustoverip.org/g/technology-stack-wg-2

  Scroll to the Bottom
  Click Green Button to log-in to the mailing list
  Then Click Blue Button to +Join the list

5 min

General announcements

All

Updates from TSWG members of general interest to the group.

1 min

Review of action items from the previous meeting

Chairs

15 min

ETSI Liaison Discussion

@Viky Manaila 

Viky will explain ETSI's role in setting standards for the European Digital Identity Wallets initiative, and the proposed liaison between ETSI and ToIP to facilitate ToIP providing relevant specifications to ETSI. 

See screenshots #1 - 11 below.

@Judith Fleenor (Deactivated) asked what we need to specify what standards or services ToIP can contribute.

Viky clarified that we just need to chose from the list in slide #11.

@Drummond Reed asked where the Trust Spanning Protocol would fit. Viky thought it would primarily be #5.

@Judith Fleenor (Deactivated) suggested that Viky do a first draft of the proposed language.

We noted the conflict on the term "TSP" as eIDAS 2.0 uses that term for Trust Service Provider.

ACTION: @Drummond Reed and @Judith Fleenor (Deactivated) to coordinate with @Viky Manaila on choosing the items from Viky's presentation where ToIP may contribute input/specifications/standards and crafting the language to add to the existing JDF/ETSI Liaison statement.

15 min

Task Force Reports

TF Leads

Technology Architecture TF — @Wenjing Chu  @Drummond Reed

Status on the three remaining primary tasks:

• Use Cases: ready to insert into the Markdown doc

• Glossary: tooling being prepared

• Third generation ToIP stack diagram: work underway being led by @John Phillips, with each WG and TF contributing their "view" and "detail" diagrams.

New work items:

1. Move spec into Spec-Up format.

2. Update wording in the ToIP Identifiers section to use VIDs.

Trust Registry TF — @Andor @Antti Kettunen  @Darrell O'Donnell

• Trust Registry Protocol v2 (TRPv2) - specification underway - to Public Review (Implementor's Draft) in Q1 - https://trustoverip.github.io/tswg-trust-registry-protocol/

  • Uses the new ToIP Specification Template based on Spec-Up.

• DID Service Profile - creating a new TF to separate the work

• APAC meetings will now be Wednesdays at 6PM PT (merged with TSPTF and X5VTF)

Trust Spanning Protocol TF — @Drummond Reed @Wenjing Chu @Sam Smith 

• The current Working Draft should be ready to become the first Implementers Draft by early February.

• At that point we anticipate another blog post and holding an Implementers Kickoff Meeting.

ACDC TF — @Sam Smith @Philip Feairheller 

Specification review continues, 84 open issues, 1 PR

• https://trustoverip.github.io/tswg-keri-specification/

• https://trustoverip.github.io/tswg-acdc-specification/

• https://trustoverip.github.io/tswg-cesr-specification/

AI & Metaverse (AIM) Technology TF — @Wenjing Chu 

• The major initiative for 2024 will be a paper on how to achieve trust and authenticity with AI

• Proposing to use a ChatGPT-style AI for use over ToIP website, wiki and GitHub data.

Credential Exchange Protocols TF — @mathieu 

• Task Force on pause - co-chairs meeting in January to decide next steps for the task force

• 2023 Deliverables included:

•  

  • Credential exchange protocol comparison criteria

  • Data collection for 4 credential issuance protocols, from experts, against the criteria (Issue Credential v2, OpenID4VCI, ISO 23220-3 and ACDC)

  • Credential issuance protocol comparison matrix (here)

• If you want to learn more about the task force, we recommend reading the the October ToIP blog post

did:webs Task Force — @Lance Byrd @Philip Feairheller @Markus Sabadello 

• We have completed the initial 30 days of our public review. We will continue to extend the period until we've completed all of the updates. Currently the only major changes is a refactor of the spec to separate it into normative/informative statements and references.

• The TF is also looking at how to make the did:webs method as simple as possible, i.e., by not having to implement the full KERI suite.

X.509 VID Task Force (X5VTF) — @Eric Scouten @Wenjing Chu 

• Contact has been made with the Microsoft developer of the did:x509 method specification. He is very willing to have us take that work forward (however he's not available to help work on it).

• The next decision is about whether that is a good starting point.

• The next step is to move it into Spec-Up.

5 min

Spec Template Task Force Proposal

@Kevin Griffin 

See the charter page here:
Specification Template Task Force (STTF)  @Kevin Griffin / EasyCLA updates @Kevin Griffin 

ACTION: @Drummond Reed to send out an email to the Technology Stack WG requesting a 7 day review of the proposed Specification Template Task Force (STTF).

5 min

Service Discovery Task Force Proposal

@Drummond Reed 

See the charter page prepared by @Andor  here:

Service Discovery Task Force

This was just completed, so the proposal is to start a 7 day TSWG review.

ACTION: @Drummond Reed to send out an email to the Technology Stack WG requesting a 7 day review of the proposed Service Discovery Task Force.

10 min

Verifiable identifier Compliance

@Tim Bouma 

Review of https://github.com/dgc-cgn/CAS-Digital-Trade-Documentation/blob/main/scheme/objects/obj-verifiable-identifier.md

Tim explained his work on compliance assessment and how VIDs fit into it.

• comment that third-party assessment is needed by market to understand the utility and applicability of various standards.

• Trade Documents 

• Review decisions/action items

• Planning for next meeting 

Chairs