Meeting minutes
Next Meetings
McCool: Next three meetings (=Oct 31, Nov 7 and Nov 14) are going to be cancelled
… we need to get done with what is left today
Minutes Approval
<kaz> Oct-17
McCool: There was a typo which is already fixed
… need to discuss about IETF things today
… any objections to publishing?
There are none, minutes are approved
Implementation Report
<kaz> PR 430 - CR publication prep and IR finalization
<kaz> Rendered version of the Implementation Report
McCool: I've been working on a PR
… got more test data to resolve CoAP/CoRE RD assertions
… some implementation descriptions also came in
… Size2 assertion has no implementations yet, but it is one we could make informative
… there is a missing implementation for wot.directory Resource Type with CoRE RD
Jan: There is one pending PR for at least one implementation for this feature
McCool: A new input for RIOT OS resolved a number of CoAP issues
McCool: (Shows current draft of the implementation report)
… some boilerplate needs to be updated here
… I made these changes in the TD IR, but they are currently missing in this IR
… (goes over the remaining at-risk items)
… there is more here than I would like, at least a quarter of assertions are still at risk
… people should focus on testing, we probably need to move on though anyway
McCool: We are going to have a call for resolution on Wednesday
… until, all remaining issues need to be resolved
… if sections are not getting enough support, we can make them informative
… if there any comments, leave them in the PR
… suggestions can be merged during the main call
PRs
PR #428
<kaz> PR 428 - Patch 8
Cristiano: This PR is probably redundant
McCool: I will have another look into it
Farshid: I think we agreed on that we can close it
McCool: Okay, then let's close it
wot-testing PR #463
<kaz> wot-testing PR 463 - Add implementation description for dart_wot
McCool: This adds an implementation report for dart_wot
… is a consumer and a discoverer
… see no problem with merging this
Merged
wot-testing PR #465
<kaz> wot-testing PR 465 - Add implementation description for TinyIoT
McCool: Do we to have separate descriptions for linksmart and TinyIoT?
Farshid: LinkSmart is failing some assertions, so I think we should go with this one
McCool: Is there a paragraph missing? I can add it in
… (adds the paragraph)
… merging
Merged
wot-testing PR #464
<kaz> wot-testing PR 464 - Add manual Architecture assertions for dart_wot
McCool: This is for Architecture, but I can merge it now
Merged
McCool: Remaining PRs will be merged in Architecture
IANA Registration
<kaz> Issue 403 - Refine DNS-SD Name Requirements and IANA Consideration
McCool: Our previous IANA submission was not well-structured and we got an response from them
… we need to go over their email and resubmit
McCool: Toumura-San, is it okay if I copy your input for the email into the issue?
Toumura: Yeah, no problem
McCool: Here is the email
… (shows the email)
… there is a separate registry for service names
… we need to answer the questions they provided us
… Kaz, can we name you as the contact person here?
Kaz: I'm OK to be put here as the contact person. However, when I talked with Philippe, he suggested we consult with Sam, who knows more about the IANA procedure for this, so I'd like to summarize what we want to do so that I can ask Sam and the IANA contact for help. If the upper half of the comment states what we want, I can start with that.
McCool: (adds info regarding the Discovery specification to his issue comment)
… question is if we need to update the IANA Considerations section
… I think it's okay but we need to check
McCool: (Regarding the mail for IANA) What is the difference between Assignee and Contact Person?
Kaz: Adding the chairs there is fine
McCool: I will set team-wot@w3.org as the assignee mail since affiliations may change
… the mail address will be around even if the WoT WG will be closed
… (adjusts draft IANA submission regarding the use of CoAP in the case of UDP)
… there is some ambiguity regarding the use of UDP in the context of discovery, since TDs might also contain affordances that are accessed using TCP-based protocols
… (clarifies this)
<cris_> +1
Kaz: Does that mean that UDP will be used to retrieve TDs via CoAP?
… I am not sure if we need to mention such a low-level protocol like UDP
… see for example Google's QUIC
McCool: Yes, we can leave it as is, however (?)
McCool: The text regarding Versioning is fine, however, we can add that there is no versioning mechanism
… but that there could be a version field added
… (adds further clarification regarding the use of security features)
… is this an acceptable clarification?
Kaz: Yes
McCool: (adds links to specifications)
… Kaz, do you want to forward this to Sam Weiler for comment?
Kaz: as I've already mentioned, I'll consult with Sam based on this description.
McCool: Should we add an Editor's Note stating that the names are subject to change?
… will add as a TODO to PR #430
… my worry is that if the name changes I don't want to change the assertion
… I will think about this
… let's get the registration email to Sam, I will send the email right now
… (starts preparing the email)
Kaz: You can mention that we talked to PLH about this before
McCool: I will CC Tomoura-San
… (sends off the email to Sam to get advice)
McCool: We made some progress. Since we will have no calls for three weeks, we will make the resolution in the main call. Please keep on testing, I will update the implementation report even though I'll be on vacation
[adjourned]