2020-11-30 Weekly Meeting

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

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

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

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
  • Hyperledger Indy DID Method Specification WG

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)

Decision Points

• None

Discussion Topics (carry-over from Nov 16 meeting)

• GSWG Proposal: Q1 2021 Joint Deliverables Package
  1. ToIP Technology Stack Design Principles (TSWG) (DP0006 Technology Stack)
     1. Focus on overall design principles – separate deliverable from the specific (DP0003 Laws of Identity) and (DP0004 Privacy by Design) TFs
     2. Focus is on TIP independent and stack layer independent. So this is a separate full-stack deliverable. For example: (DP0005 Decentralization by Design)
  2. ToIP Governance Stack Design Principles (GSWG) (DP0007 Governance Stack)
  3. ToIP Governance Architecture TSS (GSWG) <== underway (TSS0002 Governance Stack)
  4. ToIP Technical Architecture TSS (TSWG): See RFC 289 Conversion TF (TSS0001 Technology Stack)
  5. Design and Architecture of the ToIP Stack (white paper) (joint deliverable of GSWG and TSWG): Update Foundation Whitepaper (WP0010 ToIP Foundation Whitepaper)

• 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.
• Triage GitHub Issues

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

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 
•