Re: [meetings] Agenda Request - what is the right scope for functionality that should be supported in the first iteration of the joint measurement effort? (#56)

Thanks for filing this @marianapr. I am generally OK with scoping to an as-simple-as-possible MVP, but I would prefer we pick an _overall architecture_ which allows for the flexibility we think we need to support future use-cases (e.g. ML training, etc.).

All else equal, I do think it would be beneficial if we could take advantage of all the work on PPM / DAP / VDAFs happening in IETF, but I think if it conflicts with the longer term goals I think it's OK to take a step back and re-evaluate the needs of the system rather than constraining ourselves to that work.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by csharrison
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/patcg/meetings/issues/56#issuecomment-1142574105 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2022 19:43:28 UTC