Design team update
Scope question
Are we clear what the gap is between the documents today that need to be
filled in before we're done?
- Thomas: we are slowly creeping into "stage zero"
- Claire: is identifiers the last thing we need to go to last call?
- Rafael: need to be more detailed about session resumption
- Wes: what is the checklist that is needed to complete
- Thomas: discussion of protocol parameters (ciphers, etc)
- Rama: how we identify and discover networks is stage zero and is out
of scope
- Rama: can we identify requirements for identifiers for what networks
a gateway speaks for?
- Thomas: both documents just say "network identifier"
- Rama: should we?
- Thomas: can we reference
- Reminder from Wes: IETF last call process (WG LC -> IESG -> IETF LC
-> ...)
- discussion around how to specify a format of a identifier
placeholder in the protocol such that future additions won't
conflict
- Wes mentions that we could create an IANA registry for an
integer type that specifies what the format of a second string
or other value would be (DIDs vs URNs vs binary vs ...)
Topics today
Zainan has a use case we need to consider regarding DNS based blockchain registrations
- Goal would be to allow easier transfer of DNS registrations in a
blockchain based naming system
- Potential compliments the EPP/registrar model (likely assuming the
losing and gaining registrars are blockchain-based)
- To incoperate it, we need to ensure the document contain a good
description of how technologies will collaborate (or at least not
impeed) within existing frameworks, like the existing DNS
registry/registrar/EPP model.
Dogs
- Paul's dog Drummer got a good number of Awwwwws