I. Formal Opening of Meeting w/Linux Foundation Antitrust Policy Statement - Lori Mun
II. Introductions of New openIDL Staff at the Linux Foundation
A. Jeff Braswell, Executive Director
B. Nathan Southern, Project Coordinator
C. Lanaya Nelson, Ecosystem Development
III. Review of Technical Infrastructure - Ken Sayers
IV. Review of Progress of Working Group - Peter Antley
V. Review of North Dakota Proof of Concept - Lori Munn
VI. Formal Adjournment - Lori Munn
Minutes:
Introductions by Robin Westcott - new IDL staff (Jeff, Nathan, Lanaya, etc.)
Architecture Updates - Ken Sayers
Est. of Harmonized Data Store
TSC - high-level governance - Architecture Working Group to govern the weekly activities
ND protocol - currently underway
AWG - currently elected a chair - Satish from the Hartford has accepted, working with him for a couple of weeks
Current work in POC: what are the main things we are trying to accomplish? Data Privacy, Quality of Data - these are priorities. Architecture supporting these requirements -all decisions following suit and supporting these requirements
Technically spikes will follow, sample data will be submitted.
2 reports for auto to prove plumbing using current stat plans
Ecosystem will fundamentally remain the same (illustration presented to support this - IDL channels) -but move to IDL as a hosted service model supported by arch vendors Synofe, Chainyard, etc.
Priority: communication between this and member's enterprise. Adapter connected to remainder of architecture. How will arch. support the needs and constraints of carriers?
We will keep other use cases in mind
Community has to come together to ratify architecture and demonstrate architectural viability
We will ultimately get reports for purposes of validation.
Question addressed of whether modifications in architecture change risk profile? A: raw data stored in HDS; carriers manage all of data. Only results of extractions/queries made public. Other carriers never see any data from other members' enterprise. Net result: privacy becomes stronger overall.
Re: security overall for hosted node: add'l protection, carriers can potentially run nodes themselves. However partners are hugely trusted - so risk is extremely low.
Doesn't change security profile but does modify deployment itself - gives carriers tremendous increased flexibility. Internal data stores will be incredibly secure.
Architecture is in process of being approved by TSC (clarification)
Peter Antley/Robin Westcott - RRDMWG updates
Using the existing stat plan most efficient way to validate next steps of what we are doing
Next: Generation 2 will be when we start to unpack values in stat plan. Option for Code 9 - breaking out more coverage options
Then we will push to Gen 3 talking about new attributes and new values
Gen 1 completed (Auto) Gen 2 started and then paused
Group not meeting for remainder of may for AWG to catch up. 3 weeks off. Will resume on June 3.
Once stat plan approved we will start to make reports.
When working group resumes they will resume work on the attributes themselves. POC will be further developed so it can be taken to addl regulators et al. in constituency. Consolidation around participants. Format of output (report vs. dashboard, etc.)
AAIS request that an additional implementation subgroup (focus group) be formed - moving beyond the initial roadmap to the level of implementation. Suggest that it be formed under the aegis of the steering committee. AAIS offer to facilitate, informally requested additional participation.
Susan Chudwick, Sandra Darby interested in being voting members (call for add'l spots)
Call for questions (none)
Detailed discussion of ND Protocol/RFP
Lori Munn - walk through the history of ND Protocol
First attempt to do this within ledger technology. Not inventing a wheel - just re-placing it within a robust infrastructure
Oct. 2021 - RFI request that ND issued. Once RFI was issued, in Jan ’22 - ND issued an official RFP ‘Identification of uninsured drivers/vehicles using blockchain technology.
In March, Top 2 finalists contacted and tasks with doing a presentation. More in depth information on RFP and cost analysis. Written request + presentation in person
Rough sketch of RFP re: timeline presented (from slide)
Project to be completed Dec. 1st and subsequent reports generated monthly - Jan ’23, Feb. 23, etc. Other projects in mind that will use budget and resources from IDL.
Other carriers outs. of top 10 want to participate in POC and expand the scope of the work a bit. AAIS ready to go on their side. Additional states also interested in doing their own POCs
North Dakota has been an amazing advocate for OpenIDL
Critical to structure POC for stat reporting around deliverables and timelines to facilitate implementation into architecture.
It will be easier if we can do add’l procurements in future - very involved and time consuming. However discipline is necessary in POC phase.
Sections on RFP/RFI and research are being set up on the wiki, also one on the charter, minutes from other committee meetings, etc.
Legislation in play that will support this so it really is only about the technology at this point.
Wrap up - no additional questions. Next RRSC meeting scheduled out a month from last week 5/3 due to LF all-hands delay.
