►
From YouTube: RATS Architecture Design Team, 2020-12-15
Description
RATS Architecture Design Team, 2020-12-15
A
I
I
had
the
same
feeling.
Thank
you
likewise,
my
webex
in
this
disbelief
told
me
well
you're
not
connected
to
the
audio
yeah
so
connect.
These
are
your
connection
options
tie
it
in
no,
no
are
you
sure
you
want
to?
Yes,
I
want
to
get.
Why
is
this
so
unusual
for
you
I
had
to
like
do
three
or
four
clicks
to
connect.
My
computer
audio
very
obstruct,
and
it's
still
showing
me
a
call
in
window.
B
C
B
Yeah,
and
still
of
course,
you
know,
I
have
a
public
ip,
a
public
v4
on
my
desktop
right,
because
I
have
I
have
16
public
ips
in
my
home
and
anyway,
if
I
don't
nat
nat
webex
destinations,
it
won't
work
because
their
turn
server
is
broken
and,
of
course
it
doesn't
work
with
v6
at
all.
A
B
B
Yes,
just
a
moment,
hank.
B
Sorry,
I
I
have
a
a
parallel
meeting
request
with
hanus,
but
I'm
joining
them
at
the
top
of
the
hour.
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
you
know
it
was
actually
going
to
work
before
they're
going
to
have
their
other
m2m
meeting
right
now
there.
C
B
Well,
okay,
so
john
clenson
is
a
ietf
old,
old,
timer.
Okay,
sorry
yeah!
I
miss
the
pronunciation
and
written
word
is
difficult,
sometimes
for
me
and
anyway,
so
he's
always
known
for
his
very
narrow
column,
like
50
character,
wide
messages
that
go
on
for
pages
and
he
almost
always
has
a
really
good
point.
But
like
mark
twain,
he
didn't
have
time
to
make
it
shorter.
B
B
I
found
during
the
asdf
bertrand
from
it
was
impossible
to
copy
and
paste
from
the
chat.
I
couldn't
do
it.
It
was
ridiculous.
I
don't
know
why.
Hello
all
so.
I've
been
sharing,
I'm
sharing
the
issue
list,
which
has
gotten
larger
thanks
to
thomas
and
hank.
B
So
something
we're
going
to
have
to
do
is
we're
going
to
have
to
go
through
and
we're
going
to
have
to.
Each
of
us
are
going
to
have
to
take
one
or
two
issues
and
just
figure
out
what
is
the
meaning
of
the
issue,
and
if
we
you
know,
even
if
it
is
a
yes,
no
some
of
them
may
just
be.
No,
since
we
have
thomas
on
the
call,
I'm
gonna
suggest
that
we
go
through
the
issues
that
you
opened
thomas
and
we
also
had.
B
B
So,
let's
start
with
those
okay
and
then
we'll
get
to
this
issue
here
and
then
we'll
come
back
or
this
pull
request
here
and
then
we'll
come
back
to
issues,
and
maybe
we
can
put
pull
some
other
text
there.
I'm
happy
to
write
solutions
live
as
we
go,
but
I
can't
kind
of
write
them
on
my
own
without
getting,
I
don't
say,
into
trouble
there
so
dave.
Let's
talk
about
this
first.
E
I
I
pulled
two
low-hanging
fruit.
It
might
be
useful
to
see
what
the
issue
was.
First,
so
you
can
verify.
B
E
E
E
Gotcha,
all
right,
so
you
can
see
freshness
is
a
key
component.
Is
the
fourth
line
of
the
underlines
there
and
that's
the
phrase.
I
think
what
you
mean
is
that
some
flexibility
on
the
requirement
for
freshness
is
the
key
component.
Ie
is
the
willingness
to
accept
result?
That's
been
around
for
a
while
enables
caching
ned
agrees,
and
so
I
tried
to
incorporate
roughly
that
words
in
the
put.
A
E
D
E
And
his
main
point
is:
the
grammar
seems
off
to
me,
although
you
can
see
in
the
because,
for
example,
if
you
look
at
things
like
a
dedicated
chip,
a
t
e
or
such
with
no
commas
in
it
in
the
second
line
there
in
the
quote.
No,
if
you
look
at
the
the
part
in
the
first
paragraph,
look
at
the
second
line,
a
dedicated
chip,
a-t-e
or
such
and
so
on
with
no
commas.
So
that's
an
example
of
something
that's
kind
of
off.
E
As
you
can
see
in
his
bullet
list,
he
adds,
after
te
a
virtual
machine
and
he
replaces
or
such
with
a
secure
mode
of
operation,
okay
and
then
or
other
forms
of
domain
isolation
and
so
on,
and
so
here
I've
not
incorporated
his
wording
exactly,
and
so
I
was
hoping
he
was
going
to
be
on,
so
we
could
compare
and
see
if
my
take
at
that
wording,
I
also
changed
the
wind
to
an
if
there's
what.
A
E
That
way,
I
had
a
line
breaks
since
I
was
changing
it
enough
anyway.
With
me,
it
wouldn't
be
easy
to
tell
the
line
one
one,
seven
three,
that
text
is
unchanged,
starting
from
one
one:
seven,
three,
that's
the
line,
that's
the
second
half
of
the
red
text.
E
The
first
half
of
the
red
text
is
replaced
with
line
breaks
and
you
can
see
I've
added
a
virtual
machine
or
other
secure
moto
operation,
and
I
flipped
the
order
of
things
such
that
I
broke
it
into
multiple
sentences
to
so
it
wouldn't
read
as
a
run-on
sentence.
So
please
read
and
comment.
E
A
So
I
I
so
so
there's
an
implicit
threat
here
that
the
target
environment
tries
to
create
generate
evidence.
That's
a
assumption
coming
out
of
the
blue,
I
think
a
little
bit
because
it's
a
task
to
do
so.
F
E
Back
to
ned's
text
for
a
second
here,
meaning
the
issue
you
can
see
in
his
I'm
going
to
read
his
last
sentence
at
the
bottom
of
his
quote
here.
Additionally,
the
tester
formats,
collective
claims
and
integrity
protects
them
with
an
attestation
key
that
is
also
domain
isolated,
such
that
the
target
environment
or
some
other
entity
other
than
the
attester
is
not
able
to
undermine
the
attesture's
protections.
So
that
was
his
main
point
here
and
I
tried
to
work
with
that.
A
Yeah,
so,
okay,
so
what
I
would
read
from
that
with
your
text
is
that
the
target
environment
could
have
an
effect
on
the
testing
environment
such
as
that
lies
about
the
target
environment,
become
possible.
B
A
The
target,
then
five
would
never
create
evidence
in
the
first
place
would
be
hard
to
believe
that
it
does
now
suddenly
without
layered
utilization
such
so.
That's
weird,
I
guess.
E
B
B
C
B
Exactly
right
exactly
it's
like
wait:
okay,
but
yeah.
So
that's
the
point,
and
it's
very
much
is
you
know,
k.
You
can't
actually
forge
evidence
about
yourself.
It's
never
actually
a
lie
because
it's
whatever
you
believe
right
anyway.
Yours,
your
phrasing
is
just
fine.
I
thought
you
might
have
intended
to
go
and
make
this
a
point,
a
point
list,
but
I'm
happy
with
it
as
commas,
and
I'm
also
happy
with
your
oxford
club.
E
Here
so
I
I
took
it
as
as
ned
was
suggesting
bullets
because
he
left
it
as
one
great
big
long
sentence
once
I
split
the
first
part
from
the
second,
once
I
sweat
into
two
sentences,
I
didn't
think
a
bloated
list
was
necessary.
A
I
can
live
with
the
forge
evidence.
E
Meaning,
if
you
don't
have
a
better
phrasing
right,
so
I'm
happy
to
accept
better
phrasings.
But
I
I
thought
this
was
slightly
better
than
ned's
wording,
which
I
thought
was
a
good
start.
So.
B
B
Yeah
yeah
yeah,
so
I
thought
it
was.
I
thought.
B
Yeah
so
and
version
of
information
of
the
hardware
that
is
certainly
very
awkward
yeah.
This
is.
E
B
E
A
E
This
this
came
from
the
use
cases
document,
and
so
it
was
probably
wordsmithing
on
some
language
that,
michael,
you
probably
originally
authored,
but
yeah.
B
B
E
Here
I
understand
thomas,
your
main
point
was
software
runs,
hardware
is
the
thing
that
is
the
the
environment
the
software
is
running
in
and
so
present
is
more
accurate,
and
I
agree
with
your
argument.
B
A
I'm
okay
with
present,
which
I
think
is
a
one,
won't
have
in
any
case,
but
it
was
changing,
meaning
and
a
very
subtle
and
time
integrity.
Bhutan.
We
can
really
verify
then
then
start
or
having
a
process
here.
So
that's
a
subtle
bad
pitfall
here,
but
if
you're,
okay
with
present
I'm
happy,
that's
actually.
E
The
firmware,
the
other
reason
that
I
like
present
better,
is
because
you
could
in
fact
sign
it
software
you
know,
measure
software
that
is
not
yet
running.
It's
just
present
on
kind
of
a
load
on
demand.
You
can
sign
it
as
part
of
the
evidence
generation
process
and
it
isn't
running
until
much
later,
and
this
allows
for
that
to
be
the
case.
It's
whether
you
do
that
or
not.
A
B
It's
there
and
you
may
be
yeah,
so,
okay,
so
we're
all
okay.
I
think
with
that
at
this
point,
didn't
ira
high
right.
A
C
B
B
E
E
C
E
Yeah
yeah,
if
you
want
the
short
version,
I
can
explain
what
chicago
manual
style
says,
but
then
why
the
irc
editor
changes
it.
But
I
got
annoyed
at
the
rfc
editor,
keeping
changing
the
documents
that
I
was
writing,
and
so
I
looked
it
up
and
tried
to
learn
it
myself,
so
that
they
would
stop
changing
my
stuff.
E
B
E
B
I
I
I
actually,
I
actually
find
that
there's
a
there's
a
stage
in
people's
writing
where
they
try
to
use
as
complicated
in
inverted
sentences
as
possible
and
and
it's
a
kind
of
a
statement
that
I
I'm
now
smart
enough
to
make
long
sentences
that
I
can't
understand.
It's
the
god.
You
know
removable
rock
wisdom.
Part
and
years
ago
I
was
expo.
I
was
exposed,
probably
chicago
style
as
well
to
what
was
called
nortel
english
and
nortel.
B
English
was
supposed
to
be
machine
translatable
in
the
19
early
1990s
to
all
languages,
so
the
manuals
wouldn't
have
to
be
rewritten
all
the
time,
and
essentially
it's
always
noun
verb
object.
It's
just
it's
never
any
other
style.
It's
always
that
way,
and
it
reads
like
you're
in
grade
two
and
that's
okay.
E
B
A
B
So
there
is
a
case
you
can
look
up
in
the
state
of
maine,
where
the
absence
of
an
officer
comma
resulted
in
people
getting
milk
delivery,
men
getting
overtime
on
statutory
holidays.
B
B
B
B
C
Yeah,
I
I
I
will
not
die
on
this,
but
it's
not
more
a
bit
more
precision
on
you
know
generic
these,
which
were,
in
fact
those
related
to
the
but.
E
E
Okay,
so
the
word
claims
does
not
appear
in
that
paragraph,
and
so
when
it
talks
about
these
claims,
what
is
these
referring
to
you?
I
think
that
was
what
time
was.
B
A
If
we
want
to
be
precise,
we
have
to
say,
therefore,
claims
about
boot.
Integrity
have
to
be
measured
securely.
I
would
just
reiterate
content
and
then
it's
good,
because
relevant
doesn't
really
improve.
The
issue.
I
think
I
put
stating
the
actual
subject
here
does
so
claims
about
boot
integrity
would
satisfy
my
concerns.
F
B
E
Mean
in
secure
boot,
when
you
have
multiple
layers
right
from
you
know,
bios
and
boot,
loader
and
os,
or
you
know
enclave
after
that,
if
you've
got
a
te
or
whatever
the
same
statement
is
true
at
each
step
right.
But
I
think
this
paragraph
is
about
the
bootloader
right:
the
integrity
of
the
bootloader,
not
the
integrity
of
subsequent
stages,.
C
E
B
E
E
C
A
Of
their
testing
environment-
and
that
is
extended
here
without
being
having
a
testing
environment
being
in
charge
of
that,
so
it's
so
has
to
be
a
secure
method
until
you
get
the
root
of
trust
for
reporting,
yada
yada-
and
we
don't
want
to
say
all
of
that.
So
this
is
the
simplification.
Unfortunately
yeah,
okay,.
B
Okay,
so
hank
is
happy
what
about
this
bus
connected
you're
happy
with
that?
I'm
happy
with
that
sure.
The
scope
of
this
document
is
scenarios.
This
document
covers
scenarios
privately
good.
I
don't
care
according
to
rules
that
it
controls
according
to
some
predefined
rules,
uh-oh.
B
E
Okay,
this
is
the
definition
of
the
the
relying
party
role-
okay,
meaning
this
is.
C
B
E
Hank's
freezing,
although
you
can
see
it,
takes
suggestion
at
the
bottom,
pii
is
taken
as
an
acronym
or
it's
not
in
the
parenthesized
form
after
it
appears
like
four
lines
before,
and
so
his
is
fine
if
we
had
the
parentheses
pii
after
that,
after
8
28..
E
F
B
Well,
yeah,
and
I
also
think
that
sometimes,
if
you
haven't
spoken
about
something
for
a
while,
it's
useful
to
repeat
the
the
definition
so
that,
because
not
everyone
like,
like
the
first
time
I
saw
pii,
I
went
what
the
and
I
had
no
idea
what
it
meant.
So,
if
you
haven't
been
working
in
that
field,
I
would
say
that
it
it's
a
surprising
thing
for
many
people.
So
are
you
okay
with
this?
Then
this
point
I
don't
know
if
my
suggestion
really
got
in,
I
don't
know
if
it
did.
Maybe
here.
B
B
E
The
verifier
has
to
have
knowledge
enough
to
deal
with
it
at
runtime.
I
think
that's
the
only
meaning
of
predefined
meaning
before
it
needs
to
know.
E
E
E
D
Yeah,
if
you
just
say
pii,
that's
too
limiting
there
might
be
some
other
factor
that
that
impacts,
the
policy
that
we
control,
sharing,
such
as.
A
E
E
B
I
I
I
like
this
for
two
reasons.
One
is
that
if
someone
searches
the
document
for
pii,
because
they
want
to
know
how
we're
dealing
with
it,
you
know
it's-
it's
alissa
cooper
comes
along
and
wants
to
know.
If
we
dealt
with
this,
I'm
just
going
to
search
for
that
point.
Yeah
it's
going
to
find
that
it's
going
to
be
there,
it's
going
to
say
something
useful
about
it,
so
I'd
rather
leave
that
both
there
okay
for
now.
B
D
B
B
D
B
D
As
so,
I
I
think
I
would
like
it
better
if
you
take
a
add
something:
that's
not
personal,
because
system
identification
is
an
issue
as
well
right
because,
if
you're
an
attacker
and
you
can
get
access
to
something
that
the
verifier
is
sharing
and
so
from
a
policy
point
of
view,
you
might
want
to
specify
that
that
is
not
identifying.
D
D
A
governing
policy
saying
whether
you
can
or
cannot
do
that,
but
I
think
it's
just
clear
that
it's
way
more,
you.
D
B
Information,
there
are
many
people
that
feel
differently,
but
I
don't
mind
writing
what
you
say.
E
D
G
E
D
B
E
E
B
E
D
Yeah,
that's
fine.
I
think
certainly
captures
my
my
point.
B
B
E
B
Know
collapse
it.
Okay,
sorry
well
I'll
go
down,
and
if
you
want
me
to
go
back
up
again,
maybe
I
can
just
slide
it
onto
there.
E
B
B
A
Yeah
I'm
doing
the
picking
here.
So
I'm
fine.
E
A
The
first
sentence
says
that
again
changes
the
meaning
yeah
I
mean
it
was
not
the
initial
intent
of
the
text.
I
don't
know
what
the
text
said
before
is
not
saying
it
anymore.
That's
the
only
thing
I
highlight
in
the
first
sentence
and
the
sensitive
stuff
is
just
the
picking,
so
they
can
ignore
that
basically,
but
but
before
it
said
sometimes
this
happens.
A
Sorry,
yeah,
sorry
and
return.
My
comment
thomas
fixed,
that
yeah.
E
Well
before
I
was
actually
doubly
hand
wavy,
because
it
said
in
some
cases
it
might
right,
and
so
it
was
already
kvued
with
in
some
cases
and
then
it
might
after
that,
and
so
you
didn't
need
both
of
those,
and
so
it
replaced
both
of
those
with
typically,
which
I
think
is
okay.
B
B
E
E
E
B
E
And
so
the
difference
is
that
thomas
used,
carrie
and
hank
may
had
be
expressed
via.
E
E
Understand
that
I
just
I
don't
know
if
this
is,
if
there's
a
meeting
difference
between
carry
and
be
expressed
by,
I
think
the
the
b
to
carry
change
is
fine,
because
if
we
go
back
to
the
attestation
results,
it's
a
something
like
a
signed
set
of.
You
know,
claims
right
and
so
be
a
boolean
means
it's
just
a
set
of
claims,
or
it's
just
a
claim
right.
It
doesn't
talk
about
the
signed
part,
so
I
think
it's
correct
to
change
the
b
to
carry,
because
that's
the
cut.
A
G
A
D
It
could
be,
I
I
think,
boolean
values
is
correct,
so
think
about
the
the
trust,
vectors
kind
of
idea,
what
you're?
What
you're
getting
is
a
vector
of
boolean
values,
and
there
are
plenty
of
scenarios
that
also
want
to
have
evidence
that
are
that
have
been
expressed
or
retained
in
richer
claims.
So
I
know
at
least
one
system
that
was
interested
in
keeping
history
of
things,
and
they
wanted
more
than
just
it
passed
at
this
time.
They
wanted
to
know
specific
things
about
the
history
of
that
system.
E
G
E
E
B
E
So
the
more
I
think
about
this,
the
more
I
like
carrie,
better
than
via
for
the
same
reason
as
I
like
carry
better
than
v
and
yes
to
your
wording.
Michael
I'm.
Fine
with
your
wording,
I'm
just
back
to
the
word
via,
but
otherwise,
maybe
not
maybe
make
harry
now
be
carried
means
something
absolutely
otherwise.
The
other
way
around
it
taps
may
carry
or
include,
I
think,
is
the
term
using
the
definition,
which
is
synonymous
with
carrot.
You
could
use.
The
word
include,
but
but
kerry
I
think,
is
fine.
Sorry
do.
E
E
And
I
don't
know
if
that
helps
hinkling
wanting
them
to
match
the
rewritability.
F
A
B
E
E
Stop
it?
No!
No!
No,
it
doesn't
matter
it
doesn't
matter
because
it's
going
to
be
a
conflict
anyway,
that's
what
we
just
merged.
That
was
the
the
ned
change
that
I
did.
The
ned
issue
that
I
changed
right,
so
you'll
hit
a
merge
conflict
on
six
1169..
Okay.
So
actually,
if
you
delete
the
comma
change
here,
you
can
probably
make
this
go
through
without
the
merge
conflict.
E
E
F
C
Because
because
there's
another
instance
of
my
name
somewhere
else,
so
oh.
B
Because
I
put
you
in
the
I
put
you
in
the
the
yeah,
he
got
double
thanks.
Maybe
because
I
was
trying
to
use
the
acknowledgement
mechanism
like
there's
a
you.
Can
it.
C
B
E
B
Would
people
be
okay
with
having
one
or
two
issues
and
has
conflicts
with
the
base
branch?
No.
B
You
think
I
have
no
comments
all
right.
Well,
I
don't
always
believe
you,
but
there
we
go
okay,
so
55
open
issues.
So
what
I
would
like.
E
Is
so
I
know
michael
you're
going
to
drop
off
momentarily
I've
actually
started
on
vacation
starting
now,
so
I
want
to
make
sure.
Can
we
not
meet
the
rest
of
the
month,
even
though
we
got
lots
of
issues.
B
E
Next
week,
thomas,
how
many
of
the
ones
that
we
just
merged
are
covered
in
these
issues
here,
because
I
don't
think
it
had
a
you
know
a
fixes
comment.
So
iron
is
there
any
of
these.
They
should
not
be
closed.
No,
no,
no
okay,.
B
Okay,
so
so
dave
on
that
topic
to
january
5th,.
E
I
think
it's
okay-
I
I
may
still
be
on
vacation
that
day,
but
it's
close
enough
so
yeah
I
mean
I
don't
know
if
I'm
gonna
be
on
vacation.
That
day
depends
on
which
day
I
start
back,
whether
it's
monday,
tuesday
or
wednesday,
that
week.
B
B
Can
nominate
the
issues
you
can
pick
them?
What
I
guess
what
I
would
like
to
do.
I
would
rather,
if
you
work
on
an
issue
you
care
about,
so
I
would.
Rather
you
grab
the
issues
you
care
about,
so
what
I
propose
is
that
I'm
just
going
to
throw
an
issue
at
or
two
at
I
know
who's
on
the
call
today
like
later
on
today,
if
I
haven't
seen
you
grab
an
issue,
does
that
seem
fair?
B
So
what
I
want
you
to
do
is
basically
to
read
it
understand
it
enough.
One
of
the
options
you
may
say
is
I
don't.
I
don't
agree
with
this
this
point.
I
don't
think
we
should
do
anything
or,
ideally,
you
would
produce
a
pull
request,
but
I
would
understand
if
that
is
more
than
some
people
can
do
and
or
just
throw
text
that
you
think
belongs
into
the
issue
and
will
turn
into
a
pull
request.
As
a
group.
E
Or
minimally
at
least
edge
your
own
comments
into
the
issue
itself,
because
I
know
peter
you
had
an
issue
with
being
able
to
generate
pull
requests,
but
I
understand
you
can
generate
comments
and
issues
right.
E
D
Yeah,
a
lot
of
my
problems
have
to
do
with
writing
written
comments,
as
opposed
to
verbal.
B
D
B
B
D
If
you
can
do
that,
I
mean
sure
I
think
I'm
gonna
be
unavailable
mostly
until
january,
but.
E
D
E
Yeah,
I'm
not
planning
on
doing
anything
before
like
january.
Third,
so.
B
D
If
I,
if
I
get
an
issue,
I
will
do
my
best
to
make
sure
comments
get
back
to
someone
who
can
make
them.
B
So
so
it
also
sounds
to
me
like
based
upon
the
pace
that
we're
going
at,
that
it's
going
to
take
us
about
four
meetings
to
get
through
these,
and
so
that
means
most
of
january.
Is
that
that
seem?
Okay,
I
I.
I
think
that
probably
half
of
these
issues
are
probably
meh.
B
E
Yeah
because
keep
in
mind
that
some
of
these
issues
could
be
addressed
with
an
email
response
until
the
one
we're
using
the
won't
fix
label
for
the
ones
we've
already
agreed
are
in
that
category,
and
there
are
also
some
things
that
we
may
have
already
fixed,
not
that
the
filing
was
wrong,
but
it
may
have
been
filing
just
as
a
question
or
something
like
that.
Does
it
really
mean
this,
and
if
the
answer
is
yes
right,
there's
no
reason
to
change
the
text.
The
answer
is
just
to
respond
in
email,
so.
B
So
there
were
four
or
five
of
the
doesn't
really
mean
this-
that
I
actually
didn't
even
turn
into
an
issue
yeah,
but
okay
yeah
totally.
So
please,
if
you
can
grab
a
couple
issues
that
look
interesting
to
you
and
I'm
gonna
go
and
throw
a
bunch
at
people
and
if
you
don't
have
a
guess,
I
guess
the
one
one
solution
is:
if
you
don't
have
a
github
login,
then
I
won't
know
how
to
do
it
and
I
won't
be
able
to
give
you
an
issue.
But
how
do
we
grab?
B
B
Surprised
lawrence
is
not
but
okay
like
because
I
thought
that
I've
yeah.
B
H
B
B
All
right,
fair
enough,
I'm
going
to
drop
off
and
go
to
this
other
call
and
I'll
talk.
Merry
christmas
and
happy
hanukkah
and
all
those
other
things
to
you
guys
and
thanks
for
a
really
good
year
of
really
hard
work.