- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 01:05:18 +0900
- To: public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at:
https://www.w3.org/2020/04/06-wot-discovery-minutes.html
also as text below.
Thanks,
Kazuyuki
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
WoT Discovery
06 Apr 2020
[2]Agenda
[2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Discovery_WebConf#6_Apr_2020
Attendees
Present
Kaz_Ashimura, Kevin_Olotu, Michael_McCool,
Kunihiko_Toumura, Christian_Glomb, Andrea_Cimmino,
Zoltan_Kis, Tomoaki_Mizushima
Regrets
Chair
McCool
Scribe
kaz
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]Guests
2. [5]Previous minutes
3. [6]Meeting schedule
4. [7]2 Phase model
5. [8]Prev minutes (revisited)
6. [9]PRs and Issues
7. [10]Issues
* [11]Summary of Action Items
* [12]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
Guests
McCool: only one guest for today, Kevin Olotu from Bosch
... any objections?
(none)
McCool: so would accept his participation
<McCool> Bosch, Kevin Olotu
Previous minutes
<McCool>
[13]https://www.w3.org/2020/03/30-wot-discovery-minutes.html
[13] https://www.w3.org/2020/03/30-wot-discovery-minutes.html
McCool: (goes through the minutes)
... pull request 4
... use cases
... issue 7
... and new issue about Vorto, etc.
... decision of acceptance after Christian is back
Meeting schedule
McCool: cancel the nect week meeting due to Easter
2 Phase model
McCool: maybe we should have some discussion, Toumura-san?
Toumura: ok
Prev minutes (revisited)
McCool: any objections to accept them?
(none)
McCool: accepted then
PRs and Issues
[14]PR 12
[14] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/12
McCool: assigned myself to this
... Intel guys are interested
... but it may extend the Charter though it's an interested
topic
... anybody want to make a case?
... within the WoT discovery scope?
[15]changes
[15] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/12/files
McCool: (goes through the changes)
... objections to merge this?
Zoltan: usually different protocols for different discovery
mechanisms
McCool: don't want to search over all the possibiities
Zoltan: it's not a discovery use case to be strict
... not for the scope of discovery
McCool: may raise big implementation limitation
Zoltan: agree
McCool: any other comments?... can merge this PR itself, and
can have further discussion based on that
... (merges PR 12)
[16]PR 15
[16] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/15
McCool: Kevin made a PR but Bosch is not a Member yet
... so we can't merge this PR...
... let's look into it to see if it's normative or informative
... this is public informative and just informative
Kaz: this is not really a proposal for the spec but informative
example from exisiting industry standards. right?
McCool: right
Kaz: so this is something like IETF ACE for wot-security
McCool: right
Kaz: in that case we can remove the title of "proposal" and add
"this section is informative" instead
... but please let me check with Philippe and Wendy to make
sure
McCool: ok
... also would like to suggest we add some note
... (adds a comment to the PR)
[17]McCool's comment
[17] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/15/files#r404134676
McCool: tx for writing this up, Kevin!
... leave this PR as is until Kaz's getting clarification
Issues
McCool: need to go through the issues
[18]Issue 5
[18] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/5
McCool: have we discussed this?
Toumura: not yet
... this is Suzuki-san's trial implementation for 2-phase model
... he wanted to try this for the PlugFest
McCool: ok
... seems he used mDNS and DNS-SD
... also directories service by Mongo DB
Toumura: note that my first sequence diagram at
[19]https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/5#issuecomment-
598700491 is not correct
... please see the second one at
[20]https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/5#issuecomment-
599392658
[19] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/5#issuecomment-598700491
[20] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/5#issuecomment-599392658
McCool: we should include discussion of alternative DN-based
approache
... for exaple the approach decribed in issue 5
... (adds that comment to Issue 11)
[21]McCool's comment on Issue 11
[21] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/11#issuecomment-609834084
Toumura: we can assume that authentication could be done on the
network level?
McCool: might be too dangerous
... may need device authentication even with VPN setting
... let's discuss that later
... anyway Suzuki-san genrated Issue 5, and this point should
be captured within the official document
Toumura: agree
McCool: (adds a comment to issue 5)
... can this (issue 5) be captured and put into an MD file and
submitted to the repo?
... that way we are use what the current, "correct" description
is
Toumura: can ask him to generate a MD
[22]Issue 14
[22] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/14
McCool: didn't get any comments so far
... can capture your comments now :)
... pros: integrate with systems and ecosystems that already
support other metadata formats, e.g., OpenAPI
... cons: implementation complexity, interoperability downsde
... dont know in advance whta formats are supported
... any other comments?
Zoltan: interoperability with directory service?
... what would be the use cae for that?
McCool: we need to focus on supporting W3C standards
... if a service already exists to support other formats that
can remain and be used as needed, whether or nt they share
backends is an impleentation issue and need not be visible at
the network API level
... any other comments?
... I myself don't have any opinion
... would like to ask the group for opinions
Zoltan: let's do some simple use cases first
McCool: ok
... (generates proposed resolution)
<McCool> proposal: (regarding issue 14) - a WoT discovery
service should support only WoT TDs. Content negotiation, if
supported, should only be used to select between different
versions of TDs (when there is more than one...)
McCool: any objections?
(none)
RESOLUTION: (regarding issue 14) - a WoT discovery service
should support only WoT TDs. Content negotiation, if supported,
should only be used to select between different versions of TDs
(when there is more than one...)
McCool: (and adds the above resolution to Issue 14)
... that's it
... aob?
(none)
[adjourned]
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
1. [23](regarding issue 14) - a WoT discovery service should
support only WoT TDs. Content negotiation, if supported,
should only be used to select between different versions of
TDs (when there is more than one...)
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
David Booth's [24]scribe.perl version 1.154 ([25]CVS log)
$Date: 2020/04/07 10:06:48 $
[24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[25] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Sunday, 26 April 2020 16:05:11 UTC