Markdown Version | Session Recording
Session Date/Time: 06 Nov 2024 13:00
# satp
## Summary
The SATP working group met to discuss the current status of their chartered work, review proposed use cases, and plan for future directions. The meeting covered updates on the architecture, core protocol, and use case documents, including discussions on error handling, asset representation, and data exchange. A case study on a CBDC pilot project in South Korea was also presented. The group decided to initiate a last call on all three draft documents.
## Key Discussion Points
* **Reject Message:** The group discussed the addition of a general-purpose reject message to the core protocol, exploring its potential use cases and implications for the architecture. Rama pointed out the need to consider the actions gateways should perform upon receiving a reject. There was discussion on whether to include error codes and vendor-specific error messages.
* **Asset Representation:** Bill Silverajun proposed a use case involving tokenized digital representations of physical assets in supply chains. Dennis mentioned a draft on asset schemas that might be relevant. The discussion touched upon legal responsibility transfer and the need for accountability in company-to-company and intra-company asset transfers.
* **Data Asset Exchange:** Peter Lewis highlighted ongoing data asset exchange initiatives in China and Europe, suggesting minor additions to the use case document to reflect these developments.
* **CBDC Pilot Project:** Hjinsong Jujin Song presented a case study on a South Korean CBDC pilot project that utilized SATP for asset transfer and HTLC for asset exchange. The project used Hyperledger Cacti for the connector plugin. Evaluation difficulties with the SATP implementation were discussed.
* **Future Directions:** The group discussed potential future directions for the working group. Rama proposed standardizing a cross-network query and response protocol with proofs, focusing on defining and addressing "views" of ledger state. Dennis suggested extending the scope to include stage zero context negotiation and asset profile definition, potentially encompassing API 3 and asset registries. A proposal to incorporate support for exchanges was also raised. Ori emphasized focusing on the missing parts that hinder wider adoption and suggested focusing on one use case for the next iteration of the protocol.
## Decisions and Action Items
* **Action Item:** Wes and Claire will initiate a full-length last call on all three draft documents (architecture, core, and use cases) for a minimum of three to four weeks starting next week.
* **Action Item:** Review and potentially incorporate Peter Lewis's suggestions regarding data asset exchange use cases into the use case document.
* **Action Item:** Authors to review and address any comments received during the last call.
* **Action Item:** The Working Group will start a discussion on the Mailing List to define the scope of the charter after the current RFCs are published.
* **Action Item:** Dennis to provide the link to his existing draft so the WG can review it.
* **Action Item:** Members to provide feedback to WG Chairs about which aspects of the various proposals for future work they want to see taken up.
## Next Steps
* Begin the last call process for the architecture, core, and use case documents.
* Review and address any comments arising from the last call.
* Initiate a discussion on the mailing list regarding potential future directions for the working group, focusing on identifying the most impactful extensions to the protocol based on deployment needs and use case requirements.