17:10-17:15 (5 min) Agenda Bashing and other administrivia  Chairs  
                    

17:15-17:40 (25 min) draft-peterson-modern-problems-01      Tom McGarry

- New Definitions Slide

Question: are credentials administrative data, service data, or other?

Jon: Information model draft has data that is signed by various people, what the credential applies to will determine

- Data types Slide

Jon: should talk about what makes these terms different semantically
Chris: Isn't there one big groups of data
Tom: Really only two data types with these as classifications
Jon: records coming from a number of different sources with search options.  service data is about routing. administrative data is like whois.

- New definitions - data management architectures Slide

Question: is it necessary to have separate definitions for distributed data stores and registries?

Chris: data store is the actual disk

- Mechanisms Slide

Question: Should "distribution" be a fourth mechanism?

Jon: Retrieval function could be replication function.
Chris: Don't think distribution is the same class but another mechanism.

- Use cases - Retrieval Slide

Jon: hope that some of the public data will be 
Chris: Classifying data based on what should be public for routing.  
Tom: Others will decide what fit into these categories.

- Next steps Slide

Should this draft be adopted as working group draft for the architecture deliverable.

Jon: Not aware of other draft being written.

No objections, will take it to the list for concensus.

17:40-18:10 (30 min) draft-peterson-modern-teri-00          Jon Peterson                      

- The TeRI Interfaces  Slide

Chris: Is client aquiring number only a command and then deals with an authority?
Jon: These are logical roles.
Chris: Not totally clear who the actors are.
Jon: Problem statement has a lot of use cases.  difficult to generalize into single picture.  Picture is showing where the operations happen.
Chris: Looking for abstracting actors and interfaces.
Jon: For STIR, drew a different picture for different use cases.  maybe need to do that for MODERN.

- Think SCRUD Slide

Chris: What is use case for multiple records?
Jon: TN ranges. Delegation cases.
Chris: Not multiple ownership but different services

- The management operation Slide

Chris: There may be overlap between some of these interfaces when we get to the protocol mechanism.
Jon: Yes, document identifies commonality
Chris: Might be overloaded opeations

- The retrieval operation Slide

Chris: Basic set of operations is pretty small, data model is harder

- TeRI Record Contents Slide

Chris: "usually the provisioner", should it be always?
Jon: intermediaries is the case
Chris: transit providers?
Jon: Less convinced that transit providers woudl be managing records

Chris: Example could be video versus voice services?  What is definition of service?

- This is a -00 Slide

Alissa: The WEIRD comparison. protocol for accessing data where all the data is public.  Should keep this in mind that there might be a cleaner way of doing this.
Chris: In terms of scope association of ownership and how you route calls is the easiest scope to address.  Is this information that needs to go beyond people who need to route calls?

Jon: Do people think this is correct directionally?

No negative comments received.

18:10-18:35 (25 min) draft-wendt-modern-drip-00             Chris Wendt                      

Questions?

Cullen: Looks great in general.
Eric: There are a number of sync protocols, how does this compare.
Chris: Trying to keep it simple.
Eric: There is a reason this is complicated. Can't see how we get away without addressing security.
Cullen: Gossip is good if we accept constraints.

Steve: Does this belong in MODERN?
Jon: There is interest in this type of protocol.  We might not have expertise to define this protocol.
Steve: Scope questions - inter vs inter compay
Jon/Chris: Meant to be inter


18:35-18:40 (5 min) Next Steps                              Chairs


Alissa: need to consider if we need an interim meeting to get things moving