[HOME_NETWORK_TF] Minutes of teleconference call 2011-09-08


The minutes of today's call are available at:

... and copied as raw text below.


09 Aug 2011

    See also: [2]IRC log

       [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/08/09-webtv-irc


           Francois_Daoust, Giuseppe_Pascale, Matt_Hammond, Jerry_Ezrol,
           Russell_Berkoff, Jan_Lindquist, Aizu_Hiroyuki,
           Tatsuya_Igarashi, Richard_Bardini, Panu_Markkanen,




      * [3]Topics
          1. [4]Web and Device Interworking (ISSUE-16)
          2. [5]Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Device
             Controller (Home Energy, E-Health) (ISSUE-30)
          3. [6]Next Steps
          4. [7]Security (ISSUE-3)
      * [8]Summary of Action Items


       [9] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions

    giuseppe: didn't have time to update tracker but Wiki is updated.

Web and Device Interworking (ISSUE-16)

    Jan: In my latest email, I'm proposing how the merge with ISSUE-26
    may happen.
    ... Bullets 2 and 3 are already covered.
    ... Bullet 1 on checking capabilities, I don't believe it's covered.
    ... My suggestion is to update ISSUE-28 with an additional bullet in
    the lines of what's in the email.


    <trackbot> ISSUE-28 -- Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network
    Media Controller -- open

    <trackbot> [10]http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/28

      [10] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/track/issues/28

    Jan: Other comment is on ISSUE-26.

    18.html Jan's email on ISSUE-16 and ISSUE-26

      [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2011Aug/0018.html

    Giuseppe: for issue 28, you can have a look directly at the
    requirements document.

    Russell: I have no objection, I was looking at the scenario here.

    Jan: I think most of the issues in the use case of ISSUE-16 are
    covered. Russell, I think you did a great job here. What's missing
    is bullet 1.
    ... [explanations on bullet 1]

    Russell: It's really the case of a Web application being able to
    query the capabilities for Media Player characteristics.

    Jan: We didn't necessarily discover locally in our prototype. We
    could put a "may".
    ... We can use an example, in that case an example that we put in
    our issue 16.
    ... There are a couple of configurations to discover the
    capabilities of remote devices.

    Russell: but the capabilities of the media server are not relevant.

    Jan: it would be the renderer, I agree.

    Russell: two answers. For the platform the app is running on, you
    would normally have an API to determine the capabilities of the
    platform you're running on.

    Giuseppe: Isn't that already included in another use case?


      [12] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Requirements#U7._Application_Discovering_a_Service

    Giuseppe: "Application Discovering a Service"
    ... More generic.
    ... What you're discussing here could be another bullet to refine
    what we have here.
    ... We could clarify that this may enable to ask capabilities for
    the service.

    Jan: I don't know if there are for example players that advertise
    their capabilities.
    ... The nature of the issue is more related to UPnP model. I didn't
    think the nature of that was on this generic capabilities list.
    ... I didn't think the other issue covers advertising of
    ... I'm asking that ISSUE-28 have an additional bullet explaining
    filtering based on the capabilities of the renderer.
    ... If you refer to ISSUE-14, we can expand it to explain that
    capabilities need to be advertised.

    Russell: You suggest updating the Home Network Media Player use case
    and the 3-box use case (ISSUE-26 and ISSUE-28).
    ... to include discovery of capabilities.

    Jan: do you think ISSUE-14 should be expanded as well?

    Giuseppe: The requirements would probably the same. We don't
    necessarily need to find use cases that do not have overlap.
    ... Summary. Expand ISSUE-26 and ISSUE-28.

    Jan: my email can be used as starting point. I'll wait for Russell
    to communicate back with proposed text.

    Russell: ok, I'll do that.

    <scribe> ACTION: Russell to propose text to expand ISSUE-26 and
    ISSUE-28 to address Jan's comment [recorded in

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-69 - Propose text to expand ISSUE-26 and
    ISSUE-28 to address Jan's comment [on Russell Berkoff - due

    Giuseppe: Also, there are some use cases that are missing
    requirements right now.
    ... Now that they are all in the same page (once we have close Jan's
    issue), it's good to look at the document and see if there are use
    cases that can be merged or adjusted.

Home Network Enabled User-Agent - Network Device Controller (Home
Energy, E-Health) (ISSUE-30)

    Giuseppe: I think we agreed to close it, right?

    Russell: yes, but I'd like another week to make sure that the use
    case is mapped appropriately.

    Giuseppe: if you feel that can be accomplished modifying an existing
    use case, that's an option.
    ... OK, so we'll keep it open for this week and discuss it next week

    Russell: I updated the wiki based on last week's discussions (to
    remove DLNA-specific stuff).

    Giuseppe: thanks, I'll have a look.

Next Steps

    Giuseppe: we're basically done with use cases.
    ... Next step is to refine requirements during August.
    ... And then propose that to the group.
    ... Discussion on priorities and next steps is important.
    ... One issue that remains is the one on security

Security (ISSUE-3)


      [14] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/HNTF/Home_Network_TF_Discussions/Security

    Giuseppe: I'm not sure if you had a chance to look at it.
    ... There are two ways to merge it with requirements document. One
    is as a use case.
    ... The other is to have a dedicated section on security. Sounds
    more appropriate.
    ... Any comment or preference?

    Jan: Could you touch on some of the issues and then go on the
    possible solutions?
    ... Not entirely clear what the solutions are (device pairing?)

    Giuseppe: The idea is just to highlight the security and privacy

    Jan: My concern is that I'm trying to understand the two solutions.

    Giuseppe: [going through the security doc]. First of all, the list
    of security.
    ... There are more security issues. One could be fingerprinting for
    ... You need to know the trust level of an application.
    ... I list here the different options.
    ... certificate, modal dialog, white list provided by the platform.

    Jan: for certificate, do you mean device manufacturers provide
    certificates? Can we expand on that?
    ... For number 2, I presume that's a user-agent doing this. I'd like
    more details on that.

    Giuseppe: Understood. I'll try to be more verbose on these options,
    adding diagrams if possible.

    Jan: It's a question of how you manage the certificate. Eventually,
    when you grant access, where is that managed? If the application
    runs and dies, does it remember? Do you need to install a widget?
    ... These are the sort of questions I have.

    Giuseppe: ok, I'll expand on this. The doc continues with different
    trust level options.

    Jan: Can one take one step back and say that local content should
    only be accessible from local devices and say that device
    manufacturers are responsible to ensure that this is the case.

    Russell: It's pretty hard to prevent an application from doing
    something wrong once installed.

    Jan: requirements on the user agent

    [more discussion on trust levels options]

    Jan: The solution will never come to a solution in this group, but
    we could list a few requirements.

    Giuseppe: sure, we don't have to define the solutions here.
    ... I don't know if you had time to follow discussions on service
    discovery in the DAP group.
    ... There's a proposal under discussion.

    francois: comment matches Jan's comment. I wouldn't go too deep into
    solutions. Important to highlight security and privacy issues,
    suggest directions without going too deep into solutions and if
    possible extract requirements

    Igarashi-San: I have comment on home network. Very confusing
    terminology. These use cases should not be limited to home network.
    Even with DLNA, there are devices that can be outside the home.
    ... I suggest using local network instead of home network, or local
    IP network.

    Giuseppe: I think we use the term home network pretty much
    everywhere, would need to update the whole document.

    Igarashi-San: Jan mentioned managed/unmanaged. But Web applications
    can run on other types of network, e.g. 3G. The device may not be
    able to guarantee where the application runs.

    Russell: Is it at the same time or at different times?

    Igarashi-San: Manufacturers cannot guarantee that an application
    runs only on one type of network.

    Jan: when it comes to that gateway functionality. How does it work
    with applications?
    ... Should we restrict the requirements to that use case to home
    networks only?

    s/Russell: when/Jan: when/

    Giuseppe: I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean that an
    application should not have access to anything else than local

    Jan: for the purpose of the requirements, we only need to look at
    the home network.
    ... We don't need to worry about applications that are at the

    Giuseppe: I wouldn't restrict.
    ... Applications that access data on both networks are important. It
    may be disabled by default.

    Jan: As you as you say "gateway", you include remote access.
    ... If you do that, you open a whole list of problems.

    Giuseppe: ok, fine.

    [Giuseppe dropped from call, meeting ends]

    <JanL> giuseppe called me

    <JanL> he says he lost network connection

    <JanL> so we should close the meeting

    <JanL> we can discuss for another 5 minutes if we want to conclude

    <JanL> otherwise we continue on the mailing list

    <JanL> comments on writing to improve the security issue

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: Russell to propose text to expand ISSUE-26 and
    ISSUE-28 to address Jan's comment [recorded in

    [End of minutes]


Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2011 15:16:17 UTC