Re: [sds-wg] Reminder and Agenda for Confidential Storage Spec Call - Feb 25 2021

Hi All,

The recent conversation discussing Hub / EDV spec has been extremely useful
as it has helped shape the key areas the spec needs to consider and draw
some clearer boundaries around requirements.

That being said, it has reinforced for me how the majority of the items
being discussed are already well implemented and battle tested within
CouchDB (which already runs across multiple platforms and protocols). This
process feels like attempting to reinvent the wheel and produce a sub-par
outcome. I could break down the list we have discussed over the past few
weeks and point to the relevant section of CouchDB documentation that
addresses those requirements. I understand CouchDB is not a specification,
but as an implementation it's pretty darn close to what we're looking for.
It seems to make sense to have a meaningful conversation about how that gap
could be bridged to speed up this process and result in a much richer
feature set?

I probably sound like a broken record as I've brought this up multiple
times, but have not received any meaningful response as to why CouchDB,
it's learnings and it's advanced feature set are being ignored.

There's currently a tendency to put stuff out of scope because it's too
hard / complex to work within the current implementations compliant with
the spec. That feels a bit like the tail wagging the dog. Is that the real
criteria we should be using? That's definitely a consideration, but more
important is what are the essential capabilities required for a useful v1

On that front, we also need to consider performance. If we end up with a
spec that requires polling and has restricted replication capabilities,
it's going to limit its use for many real world use cases and implementers
will seriously consider using non-compliant solutions.

As it stands, the spec as it's currently shaping risks having limited
utility and will require many non-compliant "add ons" to make it usable for
many implementers. With v1 of the spec being a long way off I'm not sure
we're positioning ourselves for long term success. At the very least, I
agree with Michael's suggestion of breaking the spec up and modularising
it's capabilities to provide greater flexibility for implementers in the


On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 at 06:05, Dmitri Zagidulin <> wrote:

> Dear all,
> This is a reminder that the DIF / CCG Secure Data Storage Working group
> weekly call will be happening on Thursday at 4pm Eastern / 1pm Pacific /
> 22:00 CEST.
> Meeting link:
> Specification:
> Specification repository:
> Audio recordings and transcripts of previous meetings:
> As always, the IPR policy requires that you can only make substantive
> contributions if you sign the IPR Release Form. Please follow the
> instructions at
> *Confidential Storage Spec Call Agenda*
> 1. IPR Reminder
> 2. Introductions and Re-Introductions
> 3. Continuation of the ‘Division of Responsibilities between Hubs and
> EDVs’ discussion.
> PLEASE REVIEW: Daniel Buchner's proposed list
> 4. Issue review
> Thank you,
> The Chairs
> _._,_._,_
> ------------------------------
> Links:
> You receive all messages sent to this group.
> View/Reply Online (#81)
> <> | Reply To Group
> <>
> | Reply To Sender
> <>
> | Mute This Topic <>
> | New Topic <>
> Your Subscription
> <> | Contact
> Group Owner <> | Unsubscribe
> <>
> []
> _._,_._,_

Received on Sunday, 28 February 2021 01:55:56 UTC