Skip to main content

2025-10-17 1055 AEDT

Oct 17, 2025

UN CEFACT GTR - AEST / PST​

Invited Jo Spencer Steve Capell John Phillips Alina Nica Gales

Attachments UN CEFACT GTR - AEST / PST

Meeting records Transcript Recording

Summary​

John Phillips welcomed attendees to the UN/CEFACT global trust registry meeting, where previous discussions focused on governance requirements and an operating model for the global registry information directory. Key updates included integrating upstream work into the UNTP spec, simplifying recommendation documents, and Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay's contributions to a registrar eligibility checklist. Jo Spencer outlined the initial "skinny" scope of the grid platform, emphasizing its role in making registrars' registers visible and accessible, with pilot initiatives ongoing in Spain, Canada, and potentially India and the Netherlands. The meeting ended with discussions on financial implications, future scope, and the relationship between the grid and digital identity anchors.

Details​

Notes Length: Long

  • Meeting Overview and Previous Discussions: John Phillips welcomed attendees to the UN/CEFACT global trust registry meeting on October 17th, noting the standard code of conduct and IPR rules from the UN/CEFACT body. He outlined the agenda, which included brief introductions, a recap of the previous meeting two weeks prior, updates on actions and work in progress, and new topics. John Phillips noted that the previous meetings focused on a body of work initiated by Adina, with contributions from others, concerning governance requirements and an operating model for the global registry information directory (00:00:00). Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay had developed a readiness checklist for registrars to assess eligibility, while Alex Tweedell discussed digital identity anchor storage and architecture. The second meeting, held at a specific time of day, covered the same material but also involved Steve Capel, prompting discussions on embedding the work into the UNTP spec (00:00:56).

  • Integration with UNTP Spec: John Phillips addressed the challenge of whether to update existing content within the UNTP spec, which includes digital identity anchor content and specification, or to fork it into the global trust registry project's own space. The conclusion, reached in discussion with Steve Capel, was to work on the content within their project's space and then promote the changes back into the UNTP spec. John Phillips expressed his view that UNTP implementers would prefer all content to be in one place, finding separate repositories for related parts to be "odd" (00:01:54).

  • Current Actions and Document Simplification: John Phillips reported on a set of actions being tracked, many of which had been closed since two weeks prior (00:01:54). One action involved integrating upstream work into the UNTP spec. Alena was working on distinguishing what parts of their work would be a recommendation promoted to UN/CEFACT and what would be supporting instruments detailing legal requirements. A key realization was the abundance of existing content, necessitating a simplified recommendation document, potentially around 20 pages, with appendices and supporting instruments to demonstrate the feasibility of ideas. The UN/CEFACT plenary would be asked to approve the endeavor, with detailed decisions refined post-agreement (00:02:53).

  • Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay's Contributions and Document Management: John Phillips mentioned Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay's contributions, including reviewing documents, providing comments, and creating an artifact in the U deliverable directory. Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay was specifically focused on simplifying legal requirements into a checklist for registrars to determine eligibility for the directory (00:04:07). Comments from Marcus Alande on the original spec were promoted and accepted into the GitLab environment for UNTP, leading to the closure of a related action. John Phillips explained that the team is primarily working on six main deliverables, with additional shared documents like a common glossary to ensure consistent terminology, such as "register" and "registrar," and an "about the project" document to avoid repetition across files (00:05:26).

  • Project Structure and Digital Identity Anchor Issuance: John Phillips noted that Alena's work on eligibility requirements and governance procedures explored merging or separating these documents, with the current conclusion favoring separate files for easier management (00:06:33). He detailed his work on establishing a highly available GitLab space for the project under UNICC, which is part of the UN infrastructure. This GTR environment, built using Docsaurus, currently hosts documents from Google Drive as markdown files (00:07:30). John Phillips suggested that working in Google documents for comments and collaboration is preferable for most users, with conversion to markdown and GitLab integration occurring once documents are relatively stable. This process ensures that the project's documents are in the same environment as the UNTP spec (00:08:37). John Phillips stated that currently, no registrar in the world issues a digital identity anchor (DIA). The project Grid must acknowledge this reality, aiming to recognize what registrars do issue and how they issue it, while recommending and hoping that more registrars will issue DIAs over time, which forms part of the roadmap for initial and future scopes (00:33:13).

  • Pilot Initiatives and Framework Development: John Phillips provided an update on pilot initiatives, stating that Spain had received approval to proceed with a pilot, expressing strong interest (00:08:37). The aim is for these pilots to communicate with each other, potentially forming a global initiative involving Spain, Canada (through British Columbia's government and mining interests), India, and potentially the Netherlands (through commercial business registration interests). Forms have been created for expressing interest in participating in a pilot, allowing participants to articulate their use cases (00:09:42). John Phillips noted a recent animated discussion on why a registrar would want to be in the directory, highlighting the benefits for registrars and supply chain participants (00:10:45). Jo Spencer raised a question about providing a consistent framework for pilots. John Phillips agreed that a framework would be beneficial to encourage progress, maintain recognizability, and ensure common goals, suggesting that a framework could be provided for interested parties to fill out or modify (00:11:48). Jo Spencer emphasized that a consistent framework is critical for consolidating information from pilots and defining the initial scope of the grid, including its responsibilities and limitations (00:12:36).

  • Grid Platform Scope and Architecture: Jo Spencer, as the architect for the grid, explained that the grid is envisioned as a "skinny" platform or capability initially, with its role evolving based on demand and its interaction with initiatives like UNTP and verifiable trade (00:12:36). The design aims to start with a minimal scope, expanding only if the business case for components and capabilities is justifiable (00:14:05). Jo Spencer emphasized that the grid's capabilities, management, and operational methods will determine its technical solution. The primary purpose of the grid is to make registrars' registers visible and accessible to everyone, enabling the identification of assets and entities under their respective jurisdictions. Jo Spencer used an analogy of columns for actors within jurisdictions, with a "register registry" at the bottom representing the authoritative registry for that jurisdiction (00:15:07).

  • Registrar Onboarding and Data Management: Jo Spencer elaborated on the process for registrars to register with the grid, mentioning Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay's work on the process (00:16:30). This process would involve registry recognition by grid operators, and potentially utilizing systems like vLEIs or LEI (Legal Entity Identifier) for identity verification of registrars during onboarding. The data associated with registries would need to be maintained, with consideration for central maintenance versus self-maintenance by registrars. Jo Spencer highlighted that registries will have varying levels of maturity; some may be ready for direct external interaction and digital identity anchor credential issuance, while others may not (00:18:00). The grid would store metadata for each registry record, defining its maturity, capabilities, and how consumers can interact with its services, including service levels and availability targets. Jo Spencer likened this to an onboarding and management platform, similar to CRM solutions (00:19:24).

  • Data Storage, Access, and Financial Considerations: Jo Spencer discussed the necessity of storing registry data, metadata, and contact points in a database, making this information available to external service consumers via online portals or message-based APIs for technical applications (00:20:40). John Phillips raised the financial implications of these services, questioning if they would be charged for or free, aiming for minimal charges and maximum value without undermining existing registrar business models. He cited the ICAO PKD system as an example of good value, costing countries approximately $20,000 USD per year for full national registration, which supports passport verification (00:21:53). John Phillips clarified that if the grid offers services like registry access, the pricing structure must be carefully considered to avoid undermining registrars who already charge for registration, data searches, or verification services (00:22:52). The grid could note if a registrar charges for data verification and provide access details, but not circumvent those fees. The initial scope is intentionally "humble" but aims to demonstrate significant downstream value (00:23:51).

  • Challenges and Future Scope: Ann Dao raised questions about identifying users of the grid, differentiating them from paying customers, and anticipating costs related to high access volumes for free searches (00:24:49). Jo Spencer acknowledged these points, stating that initial scope would depend on the list of registries, with future service mechanisms adapting to demand, service levels, and data needs (00:25:49). Jo Spencer detailed potential future scope, including supporting registry queries directly if registries themselves cannot or if a unified query capability is needed across diverse registries (00:27:03). Another potential service involves providing a registrar whitelist for UNTP-based supply chains, as required by UNTP's DIA mechanism (00:28:19). Ann Dao pointed out the challenge of consistency and interoperability across different country registrars, especially concerning terminology and language differences. Jo Spencer agreed that providing consistent services across diverse registries is a long-term goal, with the initial focus on discovery and information sharing about each registry (00:29:36).

  • Digital Identity Anchor (DIA) and Standardization: John Phillips clarified that the grid's purpose, benefits, and basis are distinct from the UNP's goal of defining a digital identity anchor (DIA) (00:30:51). The vision for UNTP is for registrars to issue DIAs to supply chain participants, which would include the registrar's recognition of the business and its identifier. The focus is on standardizing the structure of the DIA, not on making identifiers uniform across different systems. Jo Spencer affirmed that they would not impose definitions on registries, seeing DIAs as an alternative credential for recognizing entities and assets managed within registries (00:31:57).

Suggested next steps​

  • John Phillips will give a framework for those interested in pilots.

  • Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay will clarify thoughts on creating technology architecture specifics for the operations team that manages the grid platform, and send an email or post it on Slack.

  • John Phillips will work on the documents in Google until they are relatively stable.