storage: Added summaries of the last two technical meetings of the st…

…orage group.

storage/design/storage-group-meetings/storage-group-meeting-summary-20241103.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+
+### Suggested Meeting Title:
+"Exploring Provenance, Graceful Transitions, and On-Chain Rate Certificates in Decentralized Storage"
+
+---
+
+### Technical Summary:
+
+This meeting delved into the challenges and solutions for managing *provenance* and the transitions between storage providers in a decentralized storage network, as outlined in the accompanying litepaper. It addressed both failure-induced transitions and voluntary or client-driven changes, with a focus on ensuring the integrity and efficiency of the system. The following key topics were covered:
+
+#### **1. Transitioning Provenance in Decentralized Storage:**
+- **Failure Recovery:**
+  - Discussed mechanisms for addressing provider failure, including reassigning data responsibilities to new providers through a "seizure of power" approach.
+  - Proposed verifying provider failure through bonded commitments and using audit mechanisms to initiate repairs.
+
+- **Voluntary or Graceful Transitions:**
+  - Explored the scenario where a provider "fires itself" by updating the on-chain designation of a new provider.
+  - Discussed allowing the client to initiate such transitions explicitly, using authenticated on-chain or off-chain mechanisms.
+
+#### **2. On-Chain Representation of Rate Certificates:**
+- The rate certificate was proposed as an on-chain construct, representing agreements between clients and providers.
+  - Potential for insuring that a provider claiming a rate certificate is on a curated list and was correctly selected.
+
+#### **3. Managing Disputes and Preventing Abuse:**
+- Addressed the risk of collusion or malicious behavior:
+  - Avoiding duplicate designations through robust nonce and timestamp mechanisms.
+  - Proposed first-come, first-served logic for overlapping claims during provider transitions.
+
+#### **4. Implications of Decentralized Selection Algorithms:**
+- Providers can independently verify whether they are correctly selected based on deterministic algorithms using shared randomness (e.g., stake-weighted random selection).
+- Discussed enabling providers to refuse participation if self-verification fails, reducing redundant or adversarial commitments.
+
+#### **5. Technical Next Steps:**
+- Prepare a high-level commented explanation of the current settlement contract for nano-payments and rate certificate systems.
+- Investigate options for on-chain smart contracts to verify missing commitments or rate certificate authenticity.
+- Explore mechanisms for client-anointed providers versus provider-cohort selections for transitions.
+
+---
+
+### Key Outcomes:
+- Recognized the tradeoffs in having on-chain provenance and provider designation for simplicity and robustness.
+- Identified challenges with overlapping or contested transitions and proposed dispute resolution mechanisms.
+- Acknowledged the complexity of balancing provider autonomy with the need for verifiable commitments in decentralized systems.
+
+

storage/design/storage-group-meetings/storage-group-meeting-summary-20241120.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+
+**Meeting Title:**
+Revisiting Directory Delay, Metadata Management, and Cohort-Level Operations in Decentralized Storage
+
+**Summary:**
+
+The meeting explored changes to the concensus on the directory delay topic.
+
+The team then shifted to discussing **cohort metadata** and provider operations, identifying essential components that enable providers to effectively collaborate within a decentralized storage network. This includes metadata on erasure coding protocols, positions, identity management, and communication within the cohort. Participants also emphasized the importance of ensuring consistent definitions and comprehensive coverage in future drafts.
+
+Some key points discussed:
+- **Metadata Components:** The team categorized cohort metadata into:
+  - **Provider Information:** Blockchain identities, network protocols, erasure coding roles, and adjacency mapping.
+  - **Data Operations:** Erasure block identifiers, encoding schemes, and parameters.
+  - **Protocol Parameters:** Communication protocols, audit cadences, and repair triggers.
+- **Cohort-Level Repairs:** When providers fail, the cohort initiates repairs via erasure coding and ensures self-healing without requiring clients to be online. The roles of metadata in facilitating these processes, such as tracking failed providers and selecting replacements, were discussed.
+- **Trustless Operations:** There was emphasis on building trustless mechanisms for metadata updates and repair operations, potentially leveraging on-chain solutions for accountability.
+
+Lastly, there was a brief organizational discussion to consolidate earlier notes, with suggestions to restructure the draft for better readability and alignment with outlined priorities.
+
+**Next Steps:**
+- Consolidate existing discussions on repairs and metadata into a coherent draft section.
+- Explore metadata’s trustless and efficient handling mechanisms.
+- Refine section 4 (Cohort Operations) to align with broader document goals.
+- Schedule follow-up for metadata and finalize missing repair details.
+
+