This is a Technical Steering Committee call. Only active members of the TSC (as described in the Operating Addendum extension) and invited guests shall attend the meeting.
For this call, you are encouraged to turn your video on. This is a good way to build rapport given we are a large, disparate group experiencing a lot of churn.
The term "WG" stands for Working Group
-
DIF Updates
- Github templates
- Background and updates from last meeting in this PR
- Template for registry work items
- Template for profile work items
- Onboarding process has been updated
- Github owner permissions - WG level or Org level for admin ?
- TSC Election
- Scheduled for July, can nominate now (including self nomination) -> nominations@identity.foundation
- Process to be discussed and added to TSC Chair Guidelines
- Github templates
-
Ongoing registries discussion
- Live Docs
-
DIF Updates
-
Github Access discussion
- Is a process required ?
- An Audit be completed ASAP to highlight access issues (current WG Chairs without access etc.)
- Updated onboarding and offboarding process in Chair guides
- Standardise repo layouts (CODEOWNERS etc.)
- Fix Sam's access ASAP
-
Registries discussion
- Things to be transparent about: ready-for-use, prod-ready, etc
- DIF Registries are not an endorsement
- What is the process to update and any governance for this documentation ?
- Guard rails for governence to be defined by TSC to ensure clarity on when to obtain approval (DIF approves xxx)
- DIDComm Org is a good example of what good might look like
- How do we control recommendations to remain unbiased - these things exist versus these things are good
- How do we determine which repositiories are able to have non-DIF members contribute (PRs etc.) )
- More discussion in next TSC meeting - cover live-docs also
-
TSC Chair - election process and timing
- async update, formal process in next meeting
- DIF updates
- Profiles discussion
- if its a subset of specs - then its easy to manage
- they could live under one group - that can be the introp group itself
- Having a clear definition of a profile is useful to decide if it is/needs to be covered by IPR
- defines new ideas, then its not an introp profile but a work item to be IPR protected (and refined)
- if its NOT defining new ideas, ie it only uses subsets of specs, then its interop profile
- How to accept such proposals?
- They do not technically need IPR protection (they are not specs) if they are truly “profiles” in classical sense (example)
- Divert/branch-out/export work that crosses over into upstream proposals and new specifications
- Does the TSC need to review the profiles before DIF accepts it?
- TSC help decide whether something needs IPR/is a pure profile IF THERE IS A DISPUTE
- Who maintains these profiles? What should be the ask?
- Interop WG if true profiles, specific WGs if includes specification work (or relates just to the specific WG)?
- Should the WG that wants it adopt it?
- Default to Interop WG?
- What should be the process?
- Interop WG first port of call if spans multiple WG scopes
- Make sure upstream suggestions and PRs and iterations move to their upstream venues, whichever DIF WG the work happens in...
- Put it on the TSC agenda if two groups want it, or donors/initiators are uncomfortable with IPR boundaries, etc
- Interop WG first port of call if spans multiple WG scopes
- How relate to profiles articulated elsewhere? CCG has SVIP profile (VC-API) and TOIP had the TIPs…
- Sam: DIF is a good place to collate/donate them...
- Chair Guide
- DIF Discord
- Testing with DIDcomm User Group (Sam) for now
- Proposed to have tooling maybe for matrix
- Should DIF listen to its users and make sure that the tools DIF uses is supported by the community?
- F2F timing - shortly discussed,
- 26th Jan
- 23rd Feb
- Troy R, Alen H, Martin R, Bernt Z, Daniel M, Daniel B, Dmitri Z, Sam C, Markus S,
- invited: Balazs N, Chris K, Juan C,
- A reminder of the upcoming IIW conference
- Discuss the language to clarify participation and voting mechanism
- Work item donation discussion
- Who can donate?
- What can be donated?
- Would DIF just accept any work item, or there is a review process?
- Accepting donation can be liberal, but the donor should align first with the similar work item (or WG) before attempting to donate
- Who makes the final decision to donate?
- TSC might be the place to review planned donations
- Including encouraging the donor to align with similar work items already in DIF before donation happens
- TSC might be the place to review planned donations
- What are Interop profiles?
- DIF values should represent "umbrella" and not selecting certain technologies
- Interop Profiles might not affect IPR related questions
- WG chair note-taking practices
- if WG chairs have a hard time to lead and take notes, they should consider collaborating with the community
- In case of chairs failing to adhere to their responsibilities
- Chairs in this situation can ask for support/tips from chairs of other WGs
- Notification to be sent to the chairs reminding them of their duties, or their chair roles will be withdrawn and the group will elect new chairs
- Brent, Daniel, Kaliya, Rouven, Troy, Oliver, Sam C, + Balazs
-
Who's in the SC?*
- Proposal:
- Each Working Group chair is also automatically a member of the TSC. However, decision-making within the TSC is limited to one vote per WG. This way each WG can weigh in on all topics, and all WGs receive the same level of representation.
- Each WG is requested to send at least one chair to each TSC meeting. This is to ensure information continuity and decision-making power for the group.
- About the WG chair's representation role.
- Is the chair represents her/his opinion or the WG's?
- It represents Personal + Company + WG's
- Chairs of the WGs are empowered to make certain decisions. If the decisions are not according to the WG it can replace them.
- Next steps:
- wording to the final proposal with a focus on:
- Who get’s the vote? -- in case of conflict
- Proposal:
-
Website updates.
- Simplified WG page update mechanism
-
Use GitHub (Issues) and interactions for decision making
- Pros and Cons discusses.
- Decisions to be public
- Troy is supported to be the TSC chair
- review deadline:
- high number of open work-items
- auto/archiving or passive archiving
- urgency is still there but it allows groups to let work not prioritized to not go to archive state
- archived is not abandoned
- One thing we could do: best estimate for finishing the work
- what the hammer looks like?
- if no point at all, then it is not a motivating factor
- If you miss the deadline to reapply for a new one
- w3c hammer is harsh
- Let's change abandoned to archived
- file an anticipated review/completion date
- Project page - but it is not really accountable
- send email to tsc when new work item starts
- 6 monthly house keeping of code and specs
- PDF - save the whole directory
- Daniel get's a date to each
- Who are part of the TSC (with voting rights)
- 1 vote per [IPR-protected] WG?
- TSC chair** over email**?
- 1 week nomination deadline?
- Are we ready to organize a next F2F Virtual event (eg on the Wed 1st or Tue 7th of September?)
- reminder 12-14 Oct is IIW
- it might be good to have it a month in advance
- Labour day (6th Sept) - followed by first day of school/work for Autumn
- Sept - 14th / 15th - continue over email
- reminder 12-14 Oct is IIW
- Decision on “Acknowledgments” in Specs.
- next step: add to template? add to /org/ work item lifecycle document?
- Timelines for Specs (work items) - finish discussion
- punt til next meeting to structure with more concrete/specific questions for the group
- Prepare chair onboarding page, what it should contain?
- intended for incoming chairs, but open to the public (on website organizational section)
- topics it should cover- best practices & requirements?
- minutes?
- chairchats - frequency, DIF infra
- IPR requirements?
- Universal Resolver service update (Markus)
- dev/experimental (hosted by DIF); "stable" (hosted by IBM) could be stabler
- casting around for other hosts - some volunteer companies in IDWG - weekly UR calls have refined this
- arbitrary number of additional instances hosted by participants in UR program (linked from DIF's hosted version?)
- listed known instances (on a dif hosted page)
- differences could be captured between different implementations
- Registry of UR instances?
- DNS round robin approach - random.uniresolver.io points to any registered instance (but each running a different version or subset)
- PR is open if people have opinions!
- Balázs: posting the PR to Slack #general might get some unexpected voices... worth a shot?
- to keep PR open for a few more weeks
- dev/experimental (hosted by DIF); "stable" (hosted by IBM) could be stabler
- W3C DID test suite hosting
- w3c/did-test-suite#135 <-- this
- stateless, no storage; no user-interface, JUST a service accepting endpoints and returning test results (REST?)
- AWS K8S cluster could host this, minimal resource outlay or complexity
- ID WG/Danube maintaining? Accept volunteers over time?
- did-test-suite.identity.foundation
- Oliver - if companies incorporate this test suite into their CI/CD, could this give people some kind of "green checkmark" or trustmark?
- Markus: Importantly, this is a W3C test suite, maintained and governed there
- further discussions at ID WG call(s)
- other topics?
- re-think voting mechanisms at DIF +1 12. (not in this group, only a heads up)
- Sam: Does TSC decide moving WGs to other orgs?
- SC
- Rouven, Charles, Daniel B, Daniel McGrogan, Dmitri, Juan, Kaliya, Markus, Martin, Oliver, Troy, Wayne, Balazs
- Universal Resolver:
- Governance and Hosting
- load balancing between different companies?
- Charles L. suggested an interesting approach to redirect non supported DID to an other UR that works
- DIDComm PeX
- one WG influences an other group - potentially a discussion
- DIDcomm is in charge to drive didcomm and its their requirement to plan
- as long as it stays civil, Martin is ok to resolve in the group
- Lets not use one WG an other as an influence
- Daniel Hardman as invited expert?
- Wallet Security WG:
- mostly about wallet assurance (this is secure, this is not)
- less about interoperability
- Crypto WG
- recovation?
- crypto WG in DIF
- to standardize/specifications around BBS+ and or revocations
- Hyperledger still misses certain aspects
- Who is on TSC
- maybe one vote per chair
- proposing names to have a chair (by email)
- chair to be someone for a year
- Endorsement Topic discussion
- use DIF to endorse a tech in a juridistiction
- is this something TSC would approve
- TSC mailing list
- First TSC meeting:
- Discussions:
- Certifications at DIF?
- Hosting some kind of conformance testing as part of Universal Resolver project could serve as a “Soft Certification” of DID methods?
- A badge, a proof of testing that would run daily to check
- More explicit certification based on multiple ongoing/public conformance tests?
- DIF approved "rubric" to compare DID methods
- People are generally supportive of some kind of testable/objective trustmark (partic if UR already does automated conformance testing)
- caution about calling it DIF Certification
- Hosting some kind of conformance testing as part of Universal Resolver project could serve as a “Soft Certification” of DID methods?
- Formalizing donation process
- governance of a repo once donated? when a repo gets as far as being a sample impl or ref impl, who decides on PRs? Just admins? Is DIF trying to host production code or just reference code?
- OS vs foundation-governed
- Contributor, leadership role on Work Item after its donation?
- governance of a repo once donated? when a repo gets as far as being a sample impl or ref impl, who decides on PRs? Just admins? Is DIF trying to host production code or just reference code?
- Escalation mechanism- if WG Chairs disagree about a PR or direction change, they could escalate to TSC
- unlikely to happen often,
- minimum size? minimum members?
- lower barrier to entry and get people generating new items in DIF?
- more stringent on archiving stale items rather than raising barriers to starting new work items
- 2 companies to start original work item?
- does this fit the low barrier goal?
- Work items can only be under Working Groups
- WG chairs and group must approve the work item before it starts
- this create an opportunity to champion the cause
- WG chairs and group must approve the work item before it starts
- minimum size? minimum members?
- Certifications at DIF?