From 0eeb567adf2cdb7396f3a4448c06799a485a89e9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Rasmus Dahlberg Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 21:29:03 +0200 Subject: persisted pads from meeting minutes --- archive/2021-09-14-checkpoint-format-summary | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) create mode 100644 archive/2021-09-14-checkpoint-format-summary (limited to 'archive/2021-09-14-checkpoint-format-summary') diff --git a/archive/2021-09-14-checkpoint-format-summary b/archive/2021-09-14-checkpoint-format-summary new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f41b8c9 --- /dev/null +++ b/archive/2021-09-14-checkpoint-format-summary @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +Decision about checkpoint format? + * First line is a free form unique log ID + * Leave everything else as is + * If anyone wants Verifier("Property X") from witnessing -> use [otherdata] + * Leave [otherdata] undefined for now, focus on Verifier("Append-Only") + * Possible documentation TODOs + * Warning: monitors need to ensure that they have fresh append-only views. The base witnessing format helps with append-only, not freshness. + * Warning: if you plan for witnesses to peek into [otherdata], it would probably be a good idea to propose a common format that will facilitate such witnessing. + +Way forward in sigsum? + * Easiest thing right now is to just add checkpoint as an endpoint and keep everything else as is. This should work well with TrustFabric's Feeder/Distributor thoughts. + * Motivation + * Don't have to figure out [otherdata] exactly right now "in a rush" + * Others can add their opinion and discuss what [otherdata] should (not) be + * We can do a proper trial-run of the design that we have and learn from it + +What do we do now with sigsum x trustfabric? + * Homework until next time to think about this? -- cgit v1.2.3