Meeting Date

• Dec 4, 2023 The ToIP Trust Registry Task Force (TRTF) meets weekly twice every Thursday at the following times (to cover global time zones - see the Calendar of ToIP Meetings for full meeting info including Zoom links):

  • NA/EU 07:00-8:00 PT / 15:00-16:00 UTC 

  • APAC 18:00-19:00 PT / 02:00-03:00 UTC

Zoom Meeting Link / Recording

• NA/EU MEETING: 

  • @Fabrice Rochette

  • @Scott Perry

  • @Dave Poltorak

  • @Drummond Reed

  • @Darrell O'Donnell

  • @Andor

Agenda Items and Notes (including all relevant links)

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
15 mins	Issue/PR Review		https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UTzCvFr8np652cnyt-WB3R3TjYjZdL0egw5wX5b5Pf0/edit?usp=sharing Consider use of "DID method enum" spec ← This is going to be paired with existing work. https://github.com/trustoverip/tswg-trust-registry-protocol/issues/61 ← this has a PR now. https://github.com/trustoverip/tswg-trust-registry-protocol/issues/58 ← needs follow up. https://github.com/trustoverip/tswg-trust-registry-protocol/issues/56 ← blocked by a common data model https://github.com/trustoverip/tswg-trust-registry-protocol/issues/21 ← aligned to the work we are doing today on the common data models. Create Implementation Guide · Issue #4 · trustoverip/tswg-trust-registry-protocol ← responded. moving this along.
10 mins	Previous TRTF Call Review	@Andor Kesselman	Recap scope and focuses today. Scope : What’s a problem for us vs. a problem for the ecosystem to figure out? Desire for an implementers guide was requested. Interaction Pattern Documentation : Discussed as Supporting but informs spec. Non-normative. Open
30 mins	TRQP Common Data Model Work	Andor	Authorization Data Model Starting Point : We will discuss the abstract data model for authorization and try to work on a normative formalization that will make it’s way to the specification. This gist is a probe but not the final text: TRQP Notes And Updates
5 mins	Review decisions/action items Planning for next meeting	Chairs

• Discussion on how to achieve gradient on the spec:

  • @Drummond Reed : Need to be addressed on Github. Assign editors.

  • @Darrell O'Donnell : Force PRs on someone with Github.

• Darrell : Multi-hop scenario out of scope for now.

  • AWS : 7 years to delete multiple objects

  • @Fabrice Rochette : agrees with Darrell

• @Drummond Reed : Step too far. Allowing each TR in the graph in the graph to answer in the graph

  • Describing you know another node.

• Building own graph of trust.

  • @Darrell O'Donnell traversal and discovery are out of scope.

  • RoR is out of scope.

• @Scott Perry :

  • Standard fields needed.

  • Transactions in the protocol

  • Payload of those protocols.

• MUST know the state of the network to answer the question.

• Need to point out the considerations for a trust network.

• Query protocol : What are the data fields to be on the trust registry to be on the transactions to work properly.

  • Minimum records of the trust registry

• We must keep it simple fro now, else nothing will be delivered

  • The main topic is: Does Entity X have Authorization Y, in the context of Ecosystem Governance Framework Z?

• Do not add any context based authorization

• Let’s not

• Need to

• Believe were blurring : who is querying vs. answer to the question.

•  

Notes:

Screenshots/Diagrams (numbered for reference in notes above)

Decisions

Action Items