It was decided that the SLA for SMPs shall be 99.5% aligning with the TICC CMB decision on Nov 24. Philip Helger, BRZ voted against this proposal (because of missing background information).
Difi commented line 282 and line 291

Line 282: Removing the line “The first MIME message part must be the main payload”
Answer Sander: That was removed because of a comment by CEF that this would go beyond the standards. Which is open to interpretation… because it is about an optional MIME parameter.
Line 291: compression with application/gzip is optional -> according to Difi tech guys this “will increase” the implementation costs.
Answer PH: the codelist of AS4 compression algorithms consists only of “application/gzip” so it just makes compression for the sender optional but no additional implementation costs are imposed, because no other compressions algorithms are supported by AS4. It’s really just a MANDATORY to OPTIONAL change.

Not using TLS is a problem for Belgium PEPPOL Authority. Belgium needs to elaborate more and send RFC.
It was decided to publish the 1.0 version of the OpenPEPPOL AS4 specs. Next steps are:

We need version 1.0 from Sander incl. Sources (Word + Images)
Publish on GitHub
Publish in TICC area on website
Add note that any changes are to be send to rfc@peppol.eu
Create LinkedIn message, Tweets etc. (optional)
AS4 work group should come up with next steps document (upcoming project milestones)

Olav in favour of Dec. 10th, Sven + Oriol + Hans in favour of Dec 6th, Philip abstain ⇒ close tomorrow EOB
Philip to provide TVR document until next TICC CMB
MLR working group to present the necessary options to be decided upon
Next TICC CMB decides on MLR policy

The content of the changes proposed by Philip were accepted, but the editing process is not finished, and therefore we cannot publish it yet.
It may be impacted by the decision on the MLR policy (if sender decides)

Technical details are sorted out (same structure as we have, no STS, 2048 Bits, SHA256)
Can the old system issue certificates after January 26th? Answer: we don’t know

Make technical support for PEPPOL Directory mandatory for all SMP implementations as agreed in Warsaw. Unanimously accepted.
By default all PEPPOL participants should be in the PEPPOL Directory except they opt-out (compared to start empty and have them opt-in). Unanimously accepted.
PEPPOL Directory team to propose the way forward (dates, tests, what to do).

Upgrade to OASIS SMP 1.0 spec together with PEPPOL Directory requirement (OASIS SMP 2.0 is not relevant at the moment)
Upgrade to OASIS BDXL 1.0 spec
Workgroup leader unknown so far

Action items

-- EoD

Browser not supported