• Start recording
• Welcome & antitrust notice
• Introduction of new members
• Agenda review

• 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:

• 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.
• ACTION: Drummond Reed will close issue #44 by checking with LF counsel Scott Nicholas as to what license should be stated in the LICENSE.MD file.
• ACTION: Drummond Reed to begin a draft of a blog post announcing release of the Public Review Draft of the TAS.
• ACTION: Drummond Reed to propose a storyline for a concluding section (or Appendix) that can incorporate all of the proposed diagrams in way that communicates the overall picture of the ToIP architecture from several views.
• ACTION: Drummond Reed will work with Wenjing Chu and Neil Thomson to propose any revisions to the spec text and/or footnotes to explain how, from a ToIP context, "message integrity" is inherent in "authenticity".
• ACTION: Darrell O'Donnell to create a document (Google doc or Google Slides) in the ToIP Google Drive to begin collaboration on the Trust Registry Task Force 2.0.
• ACTION: Drummond Reed to ask Elisa Trevino to cancel the TATF meetings on Thursday Nov 17 due to Internet Identity Workshop.

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
• TAS GitHub Discussions
• 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== REFERENCE ONLY — NO LONGER ACTIVE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== REFERENCE ONLY — NO LONGER ACTIVE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

PR #54 has been submitted to address Issue #10. Please review.

#1 6.1 wrt authenticity = Proposed resolution - added integrity as #2 - glossary still needs work eventually, will add a link to every term. Proposal to put into last call. 

WC: on the 2nd FN that talks about the availability personally feel that its a somewhat separate issue

DR: that's why its a footnote and not on the list 

SP: feels strongly that it should be there. Parties should be available so that a minimum standard

WC: at the end of the day, not a strong opinion, just a minor one

DR: you can go ahead and propose another wording or separate issue if you'd like

WC: proposes to add the phrase “another important property of the system is availability” other than having it as a trust criteria

DC: make note to revise PR - then into final call

#2 merge conflicts have been resolved, WC approved

AK: ok to merge

DECISION: Merge PR #54.

See this new Google doc for the basic outline of a new proposed Appendix B that would replace the current Figure 4.

Drummond reviewed the structure of spec, and given reviews are non-normative - Suggest adding a new section as Appendix B: Consolidated Views of ToIP Architecture

Proposed short intro and different views.

WC: If we have 3 different views, the pictures we produce won’t be consistent with the text we wrote. We should have 1 model with different views. So different views about the same model. Doesn’t think we are there yet, though. Some views will be in conflict with the text.

Sankarshan: we need to clarify these are different views

NT: let's build an actual model - lets go with what we have right now as different views, but they need to be resolved by 1 model.

AK: Different views should all fit together with no logical inconsistencies.

DR: Different views but same model.

WC: Wholesale problems - might have to rewrite text to make section consistent.

AK: need to align views and models

JF: likes having different views represented

ACTION: DR & WC to work thought and discuss three diagrams (next week in Tahoe?)

What do we need to do to close this issue?

ACTION: WC: as per the discussion comments, we've come to a resolution and are ready to propose PR.

What do we need to do to close this issue?

ACTION: WC: ready to propose PR

It appears the issue was raised before the addition of section 9 on Intermediary Systems. Thus is this still an issue or can it be closed?

ACTION: WC - no changes needed, will add comment and put into last call.

Three sections still need content:

1. Section 11 (issue #55)
2. Section 12 (issue #56)
3. Appendix C (issue #57)
4. Evolution of the ToIP Stack (companion document linked from Appendix C)

We will also need to add:

• Table of Contents (is there a Markdown tool for this?)
• Section 13: References
• Licensing info
• Feedback info

• Review decisions/action items
• Planning for next meeting