Meeting Schedule

  • June 30, 2021 21:00 PM Pacific Time - 5:00 UTC

Attendees

Steering Committee Voting Members

Also Participating

  • Judith Fleenor (ToIP, Director of Strategic Engagement)
  • Seth Newberry (JDF/LF)
  • Brian  Behlendorf (LF Public Health)
  • Kaliya Young (CCI/ GHP WG Chair)

Participating in the Second session: June 30, 2021 10:00 AM Pacific Time, who were not in attendance at the previous evenings meeting:

Steering Committee Voting Members

Also Participating

  • NONE

Agenda 


TimeItemLeadNotes
2 minWelcome & Antitrust Policy NoticeJudith Fleenor
1 minApproval of minutesJudith Fleenor
3 minMembership review and approvalJudith Fleenor
3 min

Steering Committee Election - new Voting Member

Judith Fleenor
20 minInteroperability for GHP Working Group Deliverable
- The Blueprint Discussion

John Jordan and ALL


5 minToIP BLOG for The GHP Blueprint for Interoperability - Approval Judith Fleenor
5 minPresentation of The GHP Blueprint for Interoperability Talking PointsJudith Fleenor

Open Discussion (as time permits)ALL

Presentation/Documents


  • Presentation - Agenda - PDF


Recording

Notes

Approval of minutes


Membership review and approval

  • New ToIP individual (3) and contributor (3) members and steering (1) were approved.

Steering Committee Voting member Election - 1 yr term ended

Judith Fleenor explained that Voting Members of the SC are normally elected for a 3yr term, with ⅓ of the SC Voting members up for election each year.  We did this process at our last Plenary.  60% of our Voting Member slots are kept for organizations with more that 100 employees.  IBM just rejoined as a member of ToIP, and thus the SC can approve IBM Watson Health as an official voting member.

Judith Fleenor indicated that consensus had been reached and the following resolution was approved:

RESOLVED: ​that IBM Watson Health be elected as voting member of the Steering Committee for a 3 year term.


Interoperability for GHP Working Group Deliverable - The Blueprint
Discussion

John Jordan shared that the working group chairs for the Interoperability Working Group for Good Health Pass have received notice of patent exclusions and applications held by ToIP member Iproov, a UK based company and also its Founder, Andrew Bud.  The working group does not take a position as to the validity or applicability of any patent claims that are excluded from the Blueprint.  The working group needs guidance from the Steering Committee as to how to proceed.

Brian Behlendorf added context from the JDF/LF and open source prospective.

Brian Behlendorf outline some possible ways forward:

  • One of those is you can approve us back with a published list of patent exclusions from a participant.
  • Decided to ask the working group to modify the standard to to not apply to avoid some of the patent claims made.
  • Etc.
  • But there is some some risk in these slowing adoption.

It was recommended that all SC members re read the JDF agreements. Those of you who are steering committee members are actually there to help enforce it in a way, and so Steering Committee members need to understanding what these JDF agreements mean.  You may want to talk to somebody in your own firms who deals with standards and patents and an IP in collaborative processes like this.  Just to be clear, the Linux foundation can't provide that legal advice to the steering committee members.


Consensus was that at this time the SC doesn't have enough information to make any informed decisions.

It was decided by the Steering Committee to send a neutral party to have a conversation with the organization.   The Steering Committee will meet after that conversation to further discuss next actions regarding the The Good Health Pass Blueprint for Interoperability.  Tentative date of July 12th, at 10am PT was set for said discussion.

Wenjing Chu Asked about an email he send regarding the first page of the Blueprint to align better with the working group chatter, and requested an update on his comments.  

Kaliya Young  We got that feedback and I worked on that with Rebecca today and updated the language.   Kaliya Youngwill send that section with the updated language to Wenjing Chufor his review.

Judith Fleenorstated that another version of The Blueprint will not be sent out to the SC until we have the resolutions that are a result of the above discussion, as there may then need to be other changes or appendixes added.

Drummond Reedasked for clarity on the time frame.  The working group was expecting a call for concusses today.  So we need to get back to the working group with an update of time expectations.

Judith Fleenor However long it takes for Brian to talk to the organization.  Then get back to the steering committee.  Then this Steering Committee will need to act on whatever information we have coming back.  But when Blueprint get sent out again, if there are any new updates, we would need to again have a seven day notice and period of review.  Because it's not a regularly scheduled steering committee meeting, we have to give notice that there will be a meeting.

Drummond ReedIf we do an electronic vote we would need to do a seven day notice.  Is there a way forward quicker for the 50 plus people who are going to ask this question?

John JordanReiterated that we just don't know yet.  Can count on 10 to 14 days minimum. 

Kaliya Youngoptimistic

Judith FleenorWe will need to call the steering committee together or, in some way get them the feedback, so that they can make the decisions that they need to make based on the feedback that we get. So it's not like just we get the feedback and boom now that seven days.  We get the feedback let the steering committee react to the feedback and then.

Brian Behlendorf Some of that information can get shared via email.  And agreed that the SC would need to have a Face to Face meeting, before resolution can be made.

After discussion, it was decided to put a placeholder meeting on the calendar for July 12, 2021 at 10 am PT to discuss and decided next steps based on the feedback we have at that time.



ToIP BLOG for The GHP Blueprint for Interoperability

Judith FleenorThanks to all who contributed comments with special thanks to thanks to Alex Metcalf & Ajay Madhok.  The BLOG was sent out as Exhibit B for this meeting and we needs to be approved by Steering Committee.  

Consensus was to approve the blog pending any changes needed based on information coming back from the above topic.


Presentation of The GHP Blueprint for Interoperability Talking Points

Judith Fleenorpresented talking points and thanked everyone who made contributions to this effort, especially Wenjing Chuwho started the process for us and Alex Metcalf, who finalized them.  They are as follows:

  1. Good Health Pass (GHP) is one of our ToIP working groups, and they’ve just released the 1.0.0 version of their proposed recommendation for digital health passes, called the GHP Interoperability Blueprint.

  2. Many ToIP members have invested time to make the GHP standard privacy-protecting and secure, so people feel comfortable and confident sharing their personal health information when required.

  3. The Blueprint is another market step towards our goal of enabling digital trust infrastructure that just works everywhere, just like the Internet and the Web work everywhere.

  4. We’re encouraging members to review and endorse it using the Twitter handle #GHPBlueprint—and if possible a press release or blog post from your company or community.

  5. You can download the Blueprint and learn more from our blog post: [link here]

    One comment was made which was to change the word standard used in the first talking point to recommendation, as it is displayed above.

Special Topics Meeting July 14, 2021 (Slot B) 21:00 PT

After discussion it was decided:  That the special topic discussion, after time remaining from any Plenary business that might be needed, will be Good Health Pass Lessons Learned.

Discussion of special topics for August meeting, Trust Registries or Beyond Credential Exchange.  


Open Discussion

Drummond Reedshared about the Big Four papers for learning about ToIP.  See: Introduction to ToIP  He put out a challenge to update these four documents by end of summer.   Invited to attend a meeting with Karen Hand and the White Paper Task Force to discuss the rewrite of the introduction paper.  

Judith Fleenor Pointed out this is direct result of the feedback that we got in our business review session with a Sumiran Garg, where she was saying, How can new people where to go?  So this page has been updated to include what working groups are woking on these things and what skills are needed.

Kaliya Younginformed the community that Rebecca Distlerhas accepted a new job opportunity, and thus will be stepping down as co-chair of the Interoperability Working Group for Good Health Pass.  I have idea's about who might be asked to be the new co-chair.

Judith FleenorThanks Rebecca for her work with ToIP and congratulates her on her new opportunity.  She will be missed at ToIP, but we hope she'll be back soon in.

Kaliya Young Open the topic of ID Pro, and Judith Fleenor will follow-up with Kalyia and IDPro.

Hwajeong Hwang said she would be back more often with ToIP and let us know that LG CNS has just won the RFP for digital driver lic in Korea.  John Jordanexpressed is delight that Korea's going forward with the verifiable credential based driver's license.

Drummond Reed mentioned that the first to publishers to offer to translate the Self Sovereign Identity book are both to translate it into Korean.



Action items




  • No labels