RE: [xri] Minutes: XRI TC Telecon 2-3PM PT Thursday 2009-11-19

[Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>]

I will not be a suitable editor for a spec focused only on trust. Anyone wants to take this on? I would like to see a first draft by end of Dec.

EHL

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Bradley [mailto:jbradley@mac.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 3:36 PM
> To: Breno de Medeiros
> Cc: Will Norris; XRI TC
> Subject: Re: [xri] Minutes: XRI TC Telecon 2-3PM PT Thursday 2009-11-19
> 
> Yes that was more or less what we started to discuss.
> 
> We should start work on the trust profile for host meta.
> 
> John B.
> On 2009-11-19, at 8:30 PM, Breno de Medeiros wrote:
> 
> > Apologies for missing this meeting. I had intended to come but the
> > meeting mysteriously dropped from my calendar, so I didn't get
> > reminded in time.
> >
> > I had an interest in talking about trust framework for host-meta.
> > Having heard the above arguments summarized, I think it might be
> > appropriate for XRI TC to define one that the host-meta spec may
> > allude to.
> >
> > Host-meta security is an excellent test-case for defining a trust
> > profile. Since it is information about a host, it matches the purposes
> > that X.509/CA-based PKI was designed to solve. We should be able to
> > create a trust profile for 'hosts' that avoid the more open-ended
> > questions about how to provide trust for resources, at the same time
> > avoiding questions about CA- versus self-signed certificates,
> > alternative trust frameworks to PKI, etc. Not that I don't find such
> > issues interesting, only that we have enough heavy-lifting in creating
> > a trust profile even with a playbook to follow.
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Will Norris <will@willnorris.com> wrote:
> >> Following are the minutes of the unofficial telecon of the XRI TC at:
> >>
> >>
> >> Date:  Thursday, 19 November 2009 USA
> >> Time:  2:00PM - 3:00PM Pacific Time (21:00-22:00 UTC)
> >>
> >> ATTENDING
> >>
> >> Eran Hammer-Lahav
> >> John Bradley
> >> Will Norris
> >> Nika Jones
> >> George Fletcher
> >> Scott Cantor
> >> RL "Bob" Morgan
> >>
> >>
> >> 1) DISCUSS REVISIONS TO XRD COMMITTEE DRAFT 01 REVISION 01
> >>
> >> Eran was okay with Will making the changes proposed to the list:
> >>
> >> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xri/200911/msg00055.html
> >>
> >> There was discussion as to whether clarification relating to the optionality
> of the <Subject> element should be a separate paragraph at the beginning,
> or a simple line in the <Subject> section.  Will noted that it seems that only a
> minority of people continue to be hung-up on <Subject> after it is explained
> to them, so the simple one-line addition to the <Subject> section should be
> sufficient.
> >>
> >> Eran is currently waiting on a draft with this new schema to be published
> so that he can reference it from a new Host Meta draft.  Will is going to make
> the changes a tag WD10 this week.
> >>
> >> 2) TRUST PROFILES
> >>
> >> Eran noted that he is also getting a bit of pressure to provide a trust
> profile for use with Host Meta.  If need be, he plans to simply include a basic
> profile as part of the Host Meta spec itself.  He has no problem doing the
> editorial work, but asked for some assistance with outlining the basic flow.
> >>
> >> It was discussed whether it made sense to have a separate trust profile
> for Host Meta, or if the ones written for generic signed XRD documents could
> be written in such a way as to cover the Host Meta use case as well.
> Additionally, there was a question of where that work should be done...
> should it be a product of the TC, or do we leave it to be defined elsewhere?
> >>
> >> Scott noted that if the trust profile was specific to a particular use of XRD,
> then it should probably come from whatever body it is that is defining that
> use-case.  However, if it is relatively generic and useful across different uses
> of XRD, it makes sense to have it come from the TC.
> >>
> >> John noted that it would very likely be the same libraries that are
> validating Host Meta documents as are validating generic XRD documents, so
> have consistency between them would be a good thing.
> >>
> >>
> >> 3) PROPERTY ELEMENT
> >>
> >> George wondered whether we were leaving things a little too open with
> the generic key-value <Property> element.  Is it going to become a catch-all
> for people shoving all sorts of data into an XRD that perhaps shouldn't be,
> making the element so generic that it becomes less useful.  Will shared the
> concern, but the discussion didn't go much further than that.
> >>
> >>
> >> 4) XRD COMMENTS
> >>
> >> Scott recommended that we get a head start on putting together the
> official response to feedback received during the public review.  Getting this
> taken care of now will help expedite getting to the next TC vote when the
> review closes.
> >>
> >>
> >> 5) NEXT CALL
> >>
> >> Next week is Thanksgiving in the US, so the next scheduled call will be
> December 3rd, 2009.
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> >> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> >> https://www.oasis-
> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > --Breno
> >
> > +1 (650) 214-1007 desk
> > +1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
> > MTV-41-3 : 383-A
> > PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> > https://www.oasis-
> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >