Certificate+Discovery+for+Direct+Project+2011-09-26

**Time:** 2:30 PM – 3:30 PM EDT **Dial-in:** 1-408-600-3600 | **Passcode:** 662 773 728 Ernest Grove, Jonathan Tadese, Richard Eshbach, Sri Koka, Sam Dechario, Terri Skalabrin, Greg Meyer, Warren Melnick, JOHN MOEHRKE, peter bachman, Shay Paintal, Karen Witting, Lester Keepper, Tynisha Carter, Saurabh Rohatgi, Robert Dieterle, William Ryan, lin wan, Mike Woodcock.
 * Certificate Discovery for Direct Project Call **
 * Date: **09/26/2011
 * Attendance:**


 * Action Items:**
 * Action Item—Review and comment on John Moehrke’s implementation guidelines (link is available on the wiki).
 * Action Item—Review and comment on IG template (link is available on the wiki).

Addressing all remaining comments to achieve consensus on Use Case 1 Recommendation: Karen Witting’s comments: David Tao’s comments: Any participants that now have had their comments addressed should go to the consensus page and change their endorsements to “yes”. This now concludes the consensus process. We next will be working on the implementation guide, and would like to put out a call for volunteers with technical expertise.
 * Meeting Minutes**
 * “The direct project reference implementations have the capability to support” section.
 * Is this necessary? Is this a statement of “current” or of “goal”.
 * Conclusion: add “currently” to the statement to make it more clear what the implementation already possesses versus what additional needed capabilities are needed.
 * Number 2 (of what it currently supports) “LDAP for public key discovery” is basically the same thing as Number 4 (of what it says we need to support).
 * “LDAP for public key discovery. The classes are available – general implementation
 * Conclusion: updated number 4 to reflect the differences between what is left to do versus
 * It is fine that the group agrees a “work effort needed” section is necessary, but what is the point of the “specific steps” section?
 * Conclusion: combined general approach and specific steps sections into one.
 * Reworded the general approach until the entirety of SWG1 achieved consensus.
 * Would like to revise the first sentence.
 * Conclusion: Group consensus is that David’s comment has already been addressed by the fact that this is not an end-product document (that’s the implementation guide).
 * Spell out DNS and LDAP rather than using a “/” just to be more precise.
 * Conclusion: group agrees, change was made.
 * Peter changed vote to yes.
 * Les changed vote to yes.
 * Please comment on the actual sections of the IG. Are we capturing the type of information that we need?
 * Action Item—John Moehrke has filled in a lot of the technical work. The link to this work will be put on the IG wiki page by the support team.
 * Action Item—Support team will make it so that participants can edit the IG document on the wiki.