P1735Minutes2014Jun16 < P1735

P1735 Web>P1735PublicDocuments>P1735Minutes2014Jun16 (2014-06-16, DaveGraubart) (raw view)EditAttach
---++ IEEE P1735 Draft Development Committee Meeting of June 16, 2014
---+++ Meeting Info

[[P1735MeetingInfo][Conference Information]]

---+++ Participants

   * Attending 
      * Dave Graubart, Synopsys _DR_ (Chair)
      * Rod Price, Synopsys _DRA_
      * Dave Clemans, Synopsys _DRA_
      * Satyam Jani, Aldec _DR_
      * John Shields, Mentor _DR_
      * Joe Daniels, P1735 Technical Editor
      * Ruchi Tyagi, Cadence _DRA_
      * Steven Dovich, P1076 liaison
      * Adam Sherer, Cadence _DR_
      * Gael Paul, Accellera representative
   * Not Attending 
      * Michael Smith, Synopsys _DRA_
      * Jeff Fox, Altera _DR_
      * Luis Humberto, Jasper _DRA_
      * Sourabh Tandon, Synopsys
      * Ray Martin, Xilinx _DR_
      * Jonathan Goldberg, IEEE Professional Services
      * Joe Hupcey, Jasper _DR_
      * Sridhar Gangadharan, Atrenta _DR_
      * Nitin Khurana, Cadence _DR_
      * Krista Gluchoski, IEEE Professional Services
      * Dmitry Melnick, Aldec _DRA_
      * Stan Krolikoski, Cadence (DASC Chair)
      * Parminder Gill, Synopsys _DRA_
---+++ Agenda

   1 Schedule
   1 General Status
   1 Individual Clause Status
   1 Project Plan
   1 Other Business
---+++ Minutes
---++++ Schedule
<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"> <colgroup span="1"><col width="201" span="1"></col><col width="73" span="1"></col><col width="75" span="2"></col></colgroup> <tbody> <tr height="30"> <td width="201" height="20">

Item
</td> <td width="73">

Duration
</td> <td width="75">

Start
</td> <td width="75">

End
</td> </tr> <tr height="30"> <td height="30">

Finish Draft 5 preparation
</td> <td align="right">

65
</td> <td align="right">

3/23/2014
</td> <td align="right">

5/27/2014
</td> </tr> <tr height="30"> <td height="30">

Draft 5 PDF creation
</td> <td align="right">

13
</td> <td align="right">

5/27/2014
</td> <td align="right">

6/9/2014
</td> </tr> <tr height="30"> <td height="30">

Draft 5 reivew
</td> <td align="right">

9
</td> <td align="right">

6/9/2014
</td> <td align="right">

6/18/2014
</td> </tr> <tr height="30"> <td height="30">

Draft 6 PDF creation
</td> <td align="right">

5
</td> <td align="right">

6/18/2014
</td> <td align="right">

6/23/2014
</td> </tr> <tr height="30"> <td height="30">

Ballot
</td> <td align="right">

45
</td> <td align="right">

6/23/2014
</td> <td align="right">

8/7/2014
</td> </tr> <tr height="30"> <td height="30">

Review comments/rework
</td> <td align="right">

30
</td> <td align="right">

8/7/2014
</td> <td align="right">

9/6/2014
</td> </tr> <tr height="30"> <td height="30">

Recirculation ballot
</td> <td align="right">

30
</td> <td align="right">

9/6/2014
</td> <td align="right">

10/6/2014
</td> </tr> <tr height="30"> <td height="30">

Submit for revcom
</td> <td align="right">

50
</td> <td align="right">

10/6/2014
</td> <td align="right">

11/25/2014
</td> </tr> <tr height="30"> <td height="30">

</td> <td>

</td> <td>

</td> <td>

</td> </tr> <tr height="30"> <td height="30">

Revcom opportunity
</td> <td>

</td> <td align="right">

12/9/2014
</td> <td>

</td> </tr> <tr height="30"> <td align="right" height="30">

Slack
</td> <td align="right">

14
</td> <td>

</td> <td>

</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

Deadline for review is 6/18 not 6/16 and that is corrected above.

Reviewer comments:

Steve:

9.3.4 contains a question which may not the best style for the draft, but it may be OK since this is a set of recommendations rather than a tradional standard. John will review and possibly reword.

9.3.4 Missing capitalization. Joe to address.

9.5.5 Some ambiguity with "viewport" pragma, whether the term means specific pragma or either of the two viewport pragmas. John to address.

Some inconsistent typography and question about font for terms from this vs. other standards. Also question about the importance of perfect typography vs. other work. Steve will make recommendations.

Annex B - question on purpose and if objectives were achieved. Objectives were to state all that would be needed in other standards and it clearly doesn't include all. Recommend is move content to clause 5 and remove this annex. We need to make sure everything currently in the annex moves to a good location if not already covered elsewhere, and confirm that there is no remaining reference to this annex. Dave will talk to Ray and let him know Steve is willing to assist.

A few editorial items to be posted by Wednesday for Joe.

John:

3. Definition of digital envelope inappropriate as it doesn't match our use. John will propose better definition.

5.2 states we'll use "V1" and "V2" for the different versions but we haven't. John will make suggestions on identifying applicable versions for the table of contents and other locations in the draft to distinuish between V1 and V2 topics. Steve will make recommendations for clause 5 description of the versions.

Dave:

Page 29: Can we omit the pink sentence, assuming for now that each tool vendor manages their own public key? John suggests either that or state the associated key management strategy is discussed in clause 6. We settled on removing the sentence. Joe to do this.

Page 29: Should we say all tools are standards compliant with respect to decryption pragmas (rather than encryption/decryption pragmas)? I see some variation in encryption pragmas which perhaps we&rsquo;ll address in a later version. Tools are using different shortcuts in encryption envelopes and encryptors are not interoperable. Consensus was to leave this alone as all shortcuts expand to the same standard encryption envelope.

Page 86: for DECRYPTION INPUT: is it adequate to replace the pink with &ldquo;5.2&rdquo; (and then fix the grammar) as this is where supported version values are discussed? This is part of Annex B that we've decided is best to remove in its entirety.
---++++ Individual Clause Status
---+++++ Clause 1 - Overview

Adam: No updates.
---+++++ Clause 2 - Normative References

Dave G: No updates.
---+++++ Clause 3 - Definitions, acronyms, abbreviations

Dave G: Need better definition of decryption envelope as described above.
---+++++ Clause 4 - Trust model

John: No updates.
---+++++ Clause 5 - Interoperability

Ray: Others are recommending changes and incorporation of content from Annex B as described above.
---+++++ Clause 6 - Key Management

Ruchi: No updates.
---+++++ Clause 7 - Rights Management

Dave G: No updates.
---+++++ Clause 8 - License Management

Dave G: No updates.
---+++++ Clause 9 - Visibility

John: Steve had a few recommendations as descrived above.
---+++++ Clause 10 - Common Rights

John: No updates.
---+++++ Annex A - Bibliography

Dave G: No updates.
---+++++ Annex B - Required algorithms and interoperability

Dave G: To be removed as described above
---+++++ Annex C - Other known issues with IP protection (informative, not normative)

John: No updates.
---++++ Project Plan

No updates. Follow above schedule.
---++++ Next Meeting

WG meeting 6/23.

-- Main.DaveGraubart - 2014-06-16
Topic revision: r1 - 2014-06-16 - 18:57:26 - DaveGraubart
P1735