IEEE P1735 Draft Development Committee Meeting of July 29, 2013

Meeting Info

Conference Bridge and Live-Meeting

Participants

• Attending
  • Steven Dovich, (chair) Cadence DR
  • Dave Graubart, Synopsys DR
  • Ray Martin, Xilinx DR
  • John Shields, Mentor DR
  • Dave Clemans, Synopsys DRA

• Not Attending
  • Jeff Fox, Altera DR
  • Michael Smith, Synopsys DRA
  • Jarek Kaczynski, Aldec DR
  • Devin Sundaram, Altera DRA
  • Joe Daniels, P1735 Technical Editor
  • Krista Gluchoski, IEEE Professional Services
  • Parminder Gill, Synopsys DRA
  • Premduth Vidyanandan, Xilinx
  • Nick Sgoupis, CAST
  • Albert Chiang, Synopsys
  • Nitin Khurana, Cadence DRA
  • David Pena, Cadence
  • Bin Dai, Xilinx
  • Ruchi Tyagi, Cadence DRA
  • Syed Huq, Cisco
  • Meera Srinivasan, Synopsys
  • David Tran, Synopsys

Agenda

1. Patent slides
2. Comment and Open Issue review
3. Adjourn

Minutes

Patent Policy

The Patent slides were offered for review.

No new claims were disclosed at the call for essential patent claims.

Comment and Open Issue review

Interoperability

Analysis from Jarek regarding algorithm recommendations:

Algorithm (key length)	Operation	Security	NIST recommendation	P1735 recommendation
DES	Encryption/Decryption	Compromised	Disallowed	Legacy-use
3DES(TDEA) 3 keys version	Encryption/Decryption	Secure	Acceptable	Recommended?Deprecated?
AES (128 and 256)	Encryption/Decryption	Secure	Acceptable	Recommended
RSA (<2048)	Encryption/Signing	Questionable	Disallowed	Deprecated?
RSA (<2048)	Decryption/Verification	Questionable	Legacy-use	Deprecated?
RSA (>=2048)	All operations	Secure	Acceptable	Recommended
MD4	Hashing	Compromised	Disallowed	Legacy-use
MD5	Hashing	Compromised	Disallowed	Legacy-use
SHA-1	Hashing - signatures	Questionable	Legacy-use	Deprecated?
SHA-2 (SHA-256,512)	Hashing	Secure	Acceptable	Recommended

The working group converged on defining deprecation as only supported for use in Version 0 envelopes. The intention is that Version 1 and 2 will only use the algorithms identified as Recommended. That approach has the benefit of not conflicting with existing LRM requirements, but puts them in a context of legacy use with limitations.

Visibility

John summarized the HDL semantics and cases where restricting visibility for protected IP is necessary. Ray suggested a dual distribution requirement with both a viewport-enabled and a viewport-disabled version. John noted that would not resolve all the cases.

The case with the fewest options for solution is instantiation of an open interface from within a protected envelope. End-users then have the ability to create a replacement definition that supports the interface semantics and extracts pathnames (and other discoverable attributes?) from the hierarchy that goes through the protected envelope.

Dave's suggestion from last week of an additional right seemed attractive. The group discussed whether that should be a common right or a tool-specific right. Steven suggested that defining it as a common right where the only defined value was "delegated" would give us a migration path to the desired result, even if we cannot completely articulate that for this version of the standard. That would rely on tool-specific rights which address the desired behaviors.

Steven asked the working group to consider a single common right with a delegated value as a crude fallback if defining a more comprehensive rights framework would take longer to achieve consensus. John thought he could define something more detailed based on the verbal consensus and his understanding of the problem. Since this is the long-pole in the schedule, John agreed to provide Steven a completion estimate so the PAR revision could be submitted.

Work Plan

Date	Clause	Title	Champion	Status
7/15	1	Intro	Steven
7/8	2	Normative Ref	?
7/12	3	Definitions	?
7/16	4	Trust	Steven
7/19	5	Interop	Ray
7/17	6	Key Mgmt	Steven
6/21	7	Rights Mgmt	Dave G	done
7/8	8	License Mgmt	Dave G
6/28	9	Common Rights	John	done
7/10	10	Visibility	John
7/8	A	Bibliography	?
6/28	B	Required Algorithms	?
4/25	X	Visbility Annex	John	done

Next Meeting

The next Draft Development Committee meeting is scheduled for August 12, 2013 at 16:00UTC.

Tentative Agenda

1. Patent slides
2. Comment and Open Issue review
3. Adjourn

Adjournment

Meeting adjourned at 16:35UTC

Approval

These minutes are unapproved.

-- StevenDovich - 2013-07-29