2015-07-28 Meeting Notes

Date

July 28th, 2015

Attendees

Goals

Kantara IPR Feedback, Review and Agreement
Principles Review

Discussion Items

Time	Item	Who	Notes
1 min	Kantara IPR	Sal	Kantara IPR http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/download/attachments/2293776/Kantara+Initiative+IPR+Policies+_V1.1_.pdf?version=1
3 mins	Roll Call	Sal	Roll, new intros, announcements
7 mins	Secretary Nomination	Sal	Secretary nomination and election - Kimberly Johnson - put out electronic ballot
4 mins	Minutes/Notes Update	Sal	https://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/irm/Meeting+Notes?src=conte%0xtnavchildmode , also see Ian meeting notes in WG email thread
35 mins	Principles	All	Provable & Actionable
3 mins	Other Admin	All	Other Administrative, Action Item Review (not covered above)
1 mins	AoB	All	AoB TBD...

Action Items

High-level Topics Covered

Role call
Secretary Nomination
Principles Discussion
- Provable
- Actionable

Detailed Meeting Notes

Continuing to work through principles and the conversation on constrainable and then onward to other principles.

OK with current comments on constrainable.

Turn to provable. Describes relations, there is a “level of assurance”, at creation of the relationship and then “at run time”, 2.6.1-3 are just instances and could be a red herring in the discussion. These are almost assertion types not “how you prove it”, there is a requirement for establish a way to prove or “source” or “authoritative source”, level of trust of creator, owner, members, relying party.

This seems like a “relationship manager”, so hand over a block chain or “IRM token” to someone who can answer the question “valid for me and this?”

Issues are associated/similar to those of identity assurance/attributes. Relationships may not be as directly “related” to an individual or thing as identity attributes. So ideas around provable might be an example of where identity and relationship might be the same.

So if something is proven once what does that mean.

Principles can have dependencies on other principles in use, so as an example provable/immutable could be assumed provable over time vs. provable/mutable might require “freshness” or “run time” check.

So transferring a relationship might be OK for an individual but revoking might be more complex, so what permission or control tracks to actionable principles.

So determining a relationship exists is one kind of “proof” but are there other aspects of relationships where provable apply, do others come into play as to whether actions can be taken. So does provable apply to actions? Maybe.. is this authentication, authorization, or is this actionable.

Leading to a look at actionable.

Needs an example, e.g. a legally signed contract.

Is it possible to have a relationship that is not actionable? Is that a relationship with no value or no relationship at all?

Is this a legitimate item. Relationships exist period. The fact that it enables an action may not be much of a matter? <- Ian can you chime in.

Quality control is not exactly a principle, so is actionable a business relationship vs. principle.

This might relate “IRM tokens” but you can’t really be sure based on the text here.

Maybe there is another word(s), is this the ability to carry actionable (e.g. authZ) information