Re: [meetings] January 2022 Meeting (#5)

On 2022-01-06 01:10, Sean Turner via GitHub wrote:
> ## Shifting later
> 
> I am entirely open to shifting the meeting out into end of January / 
> beginning of February to allow more time to prepare. Is one more week or 
> two needed? How about (and for those in the next day timezones these 
> days are +1):
> 
> - 31 Jan & 1 Feb
> - 1 & 2 Feb
> - 2 & 3 Feb
> - 7 & 8 Feb
> - 9 & 10 Feb

I agree with shifting the dates a little later, especially if we're 
going to be looking at a number of proposals — it takes time to read, 
prepare notes, etc.


> ## Time of day
> 
> There are interested parties in all of the time zones we chose. There is 
> really no ideal time and I am sure that no matter what time we pick 
> there will be request to move it.  I am not proposing that all meetings 
> will happen at this time, I suspect we should adopt a compromise 
> position and make it painful for everyone at some time and rotate the 
> times.

In order to make this meeting's time palatable to all, I suggest that we 
resolve right away to rotate the pain.

> ## Agenda
> 
> Not sure if there is a standard, but I hoping to use this issue to 
> develop the agenda. We need to address our current deliverable [Privacy 
> Principles for Web Advertising 
> Features](https://patcg.github.io/charter.html#work). We also need to 
> give air time to some of the proposals that are out there; we have 
> already received two "do we fit in patcg" requests and I am sure there 
> are more. In other words, the agenda is pretty wide open and we are 
> accepting agenda topics. Please kindly keep the 
> [scope](https://patcg.github.io/charter.html#scope) in mind.

Note that the TAG and PING are currently working on Privacy Principles, 
and I hope that the task force will have something reviewable ready in 
time. I would hope that the Web Advertising document could be a short 
overlay primarily referencing that.

Agenda+ suggestions:

* Requirements for Web advertising: On of the difficulties with this 
project is that the advertising ecosystem is complex and highly 
integrated, it's not always readily obvious how one can just fix one 
problem as it will often be intertwined. I think that we would benefit 
from having a landscape document that we tend to over time to stay 
aligned on what we're striving for and how the parts fit together. It 
doesn't have to be extremely complex or detailed, but it should be 
principled. This could subsume the privacy doc.

* WG charter: One of the purposes of this group is to channel 
sufficiently ready work into a WG. We should figure out how to get that 
up and running sooner rather than later.

* Shared infrastructure governance model: In previous episodes, I 
proposed [GARUDA](https://darobin.github.io/garuda/) as a way of 
governing shared infrastructure for trusted servers. It was mostly meant 
to outline what is possible; it can be generalised to shared 
infrastructure other than PARAKEET-style trusted servers. I think it's a 
useful part of the toolbox. It might be good to hear from the Let's 
Encrypt folks on this too.

-- 
Robin Berjon
VP Data Governance
The New York Times Company

Received on Thursday, 6 January 2022 16:43:00 UTC