Skip to main content
Version: Stage 4 - For Public Review

Meeting 2026-09-03 1657 AEST

UN/CEFACT GRID Project - EU​

Date: Sep 3, 2026

Attendees​

Ajay Jadhav

Alina Nica Gales

Hans Huber

Jo Spencer (first half)

John Phillips

Sankarshan

Summary​

Project updates and review analysis with documentation refinements and global trust alignment via stakeholder outreach.

Project Updates and Review
Public review period continues with outreach. Technical comments analyzed regarding verifiable credentials.

Documentation and Requirements
Documentation refined for clarity. Requirements maintained in technology-neutral terms.

Global Trust and Alignment
European Wallet compatibility debated. Stakeholder alignment achieved for pilot implementation.

Next steps​

  • [John Phillips] Document Event Logs: Write up the merged ideas regarding cryptographic event logs in a publicly digestible format.

  • [sankarshan] Update Implementation Guidelines: Continue contributing to and developing the implementation guidelines for the grid project.

  • [Alina Nica Gales] Launch Spain Pilot: Begin the implementation work for the Spain pilot project.

Details​

  • Project Updates and Infrastructure: John Phillips opened the meeting by noting that the UN/CEFACT GRID project is currently in the latter half of the public review period [00:00:02]. While there have been minor maintenance-related outages on the UNICC infrastructure and the GitLab repository, the website remains operational and features a new, consistent look and feel across all UN/CEFACT hosted projects [00:00:55].

  • Public Review Period: The public review is scheduled to conclude on September 21st, with approximately 18 days remaining. Although feedback has been received from the UK, Kazakhstan, and the WCO, the team is actively encouraging further participation following recent outreach efforts [00:01:57].

  • Review Comment Analysis: Verifiable Credentials: John Phillips discussed a detailed review comment from Manu Fontaine, who proposed removing verifiable credentials in favor of a system where every component, including hardware, is cryptographically verified [00:02:54]. The team, including Alina Nica Gales, Hans, and Sankarshan, analyzed this feedback, concluding that the proposal represents a "purist" technical approach that effectively eliminates human control and legal authority, which the project currently relies upon [00:05:03].

  • Straw Man Argument and Project Scope: Hans and John Phillips identified the commenter’s proposal as a "straw man" argument because the GRID project does not claim to be a system for global trust, nor does it equate cryptographic verifiability with absolute truth. The team agreed that this specific critique is better suited for other projects, such as UNTP, rather than the GRID [00:08:49].

  • Documentation and Glossary Cleanup: To prevent future misinterpretations of the project's intent, the team decided to refine the project documentation [00:12:00]. John Phillips created a dedicated branch, "public review comments update number two," which features tightened definitions for terms such as AML and Generative AI, as well as an updated, concise definition for verifiable credentials that references the W3C data model version 2.0 [00:13:07].

  • Historical Verification and Status Changes: Issues #75 and #78, raised by a reviewer, highlighted the necessity of managing cryptographic keys during status changes, such as the suspension or withdrawal of an entity [00:16:22]. The team discussed the need to bridge the gap between the existing legal operating model and the technical implementation to ensure these changes are accurately reflected [00:17:36].

  • Cryptographic Event Log Requirements: To address historical verification, the team discussed utilizing cryptographic event logs to ensure the traceability of keys over long durations, such as 10 to 20 years [00:17:36] [00:21:54]. John Phillips emphasized the need to merge these technical key management requirements with business-level processes, such as issuing and withdrawing credentials, to create a cohesive system [00:18:47].

  • Technology Neutrality in Implementation: Sankarshan and John Phillips cautioned against drafting requirements that inadvertently force the adoption of one specific technology or implementation, such as KERI, as the sole standard [00:20:50]. The team reached a consensus to write requirements in technology-neutral terms while ensuring that implementation guidelines provide a clear, practical path forward [00:22:48].

  • GDC Session: Trust Registries: Alina Nica Gales presented on the "Trust registries have always existed" session held at the GDC [00:24:52]. The discussion focused on how the Digital Identity Anchor (DIA) complements other digital identity initiatives and addresses concerns raised by the "We Build" consortium regarding cross-border trade [00:26:05].

  • European Wallet Compatibility: During the GDC meetings, a debate occurred regarding the suggestion that non-EU companies must adopt a European Wallet to engage in cross-border trade [00:26:05]. The team concluded that this requirement is impractical and likely legally impossible for businesses outside the EU, reaffirming that the DIA functions as a global solution rather than a regional one [00:28:40] [00:38:10].

  • Project Alignment and Future Collaboration: Alina Nica Gales reported positive progress from meetings with key stakeholders, including Ignacio Alamo and Dennis Haniman, who now recognize that the DIA and European Wallet initiatives are complementary rather than competing. These stakeholders have expressed support for the project and are assisting with the development and implementation of the pilot [00:30:49] [00:33:26].

  • Project Outreach and Future Milestones: John Phillips noted continued interest in the pilot programs from regions including India and China [00:34:11]. The team aims to advance these collaborations before the upcoming plenary in November, where they hope UN/CEFACT will recognize the need for a dedicated body to operate the GRID [00:35:15].

Chat​

00:04:14.747,00:04:17.747

sankarshan: link to the issue: https://opensource.unicc.org/un/unece/uncefact/gtr/-/issues/79

00:05:38.027,00:05:41.027

sankarshan: *sigh* the Gitlab upgrade seems to have broken how the issue loads - earlier it used to load as a page, now it tries to load as a pop-out. I guess this is some mobile friendly UX shenanigan.

00:12:44.007,00:12:47.007

Ajay Jadhav: Hello everyone :)

00:13:02.827,00:13:05.827

Alina Nica Gales: Hello Ajay!

00:13:10.414,00:13:13.414

Jo Spencer: Hi Ajay! Welcome

00:22:23.955,00:22:26.955

Jo Spencer: Apologies - I have to drop. I'm fully in sync with the proposed approaches...

00:28:01.649,00:28:04.649

sankarshan: We might as well add a FAQ entry about this :)