# Meeting Minutes September 10, 2025 ## Attendees: | Name | Attendance | Role | Voting Seat (Y/N) | Term | | ------------------------ | ---------- | ----------- | ----------------- | ------------ | | Kevin Hammond | Yes | Chair | Y | October 2025 | | Adam Dean | No | Vice Chair | Y | October 2025 | | Terence ‘Tex’ McCutcheon | Yes | Secretary | N | N/A | | Lorenzo Bruno | Yes | Secretary | N | N/A | | Markus Gufler | Yes | Member/Seat | Y | October 2025 | | Nicolas Biri | Yes | Member/Seat | Y | April 2026 | | Duncan Coutts | Yes | Member/Seat | Y | April 2026 | | Jonathan Kelly | Yes | Member/Seat | Y | October 2025 | | Sebastian Nagel | Yes | Member/Seat | Y | April 2026 | | Benjamin Hart | Yes | Member/Seat | Y | October 2025 | | Neil Davies | Yes | Member/Seat | Y | April 2026 | | Alexander Moser | No | Member/Seat | Y | April 2026 | Community/Other Attendees * Christian Taylor * Gintama * Ryan Williams **Recording:** [Technical Steering Committee - 2025/09/10 - Recording](https://drive.google.com/file/d/14Oa2oi8URuDenU6hXRIMn4JKvegICmAl/view?usp=sharing) **Transcript:** [Technical Steering Committee - 2025/09/10 - Transcript](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IGQ7dV8cwbhZir7HkEr1Sn-_ryeoUMp6cJxaIGm-b4I/edit?usp=sharing) **Chat Transcript:** [Technical Steering Committee - 2025/09/10 - Chat Transcript](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IVa-gm5kta-z568VxJqgrIrIX0TAW9U3/view?usp=sharing) ## Intros **Adam:** OSC, TSC, CIP Editor, DripDropz LLC\ **Alex:** TBD\ **Ben:** TBD\ **Duncan:** TBD\ **Johnny:** Non-Custodial Co-Management SysOps Engineer (Tech Janitor) for 3 Mainnet\ Cardano SPO Clients. Keystone Ambassador. Voting Seat Member on Technical Steering\ Committee and Open Source Committee.\ **Kevin:** TBD\ **Lorenzo:** TBD\ **Markus:** TBD\ **Neil:** TSC, Network Params, PNSol Ltd\ **Nicolas:** TBD\ **Sebastian:** TBD\ **Tex:** Open Source Program Manager (Intersect), GMC/MCC/OSC Secretary, Committee Liaison ## Agenda 9.10.25 * Revised Remit and Questions for Election Candidates - [Proposed Remit](https://docs.google.com/document/d/13mV92oSQsr8eGJDdoLcDgSkUpkiaw2Q4I7c3I2Jjwy4/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.87ke6dpzo8m9) * Feedback on Leios CIP - Adam/Nicolas * Reconvening the HF Working Group - Kevin * Update on 2030 Vision - Adam * Update on “Fire Drill” - Johnny/Kevin * Chair - Lorenzo/Kevin * (Feedback on Committee remuneration) - Lorenzo/Kevin * AOB ## Decisions/Actions #### Decisions * A vote on the revised **TSC remit** was postponed to be conducted offline. * The discussion and vote for a new **TSC chair** were postponed until after the upcoming elections. #### Actions * **Kevin:** Coordinate with Lorenzo, Tex, and others to schedule technical discussion meetings for the Leios proposal. * **Kevin:** Post a summary of the agreed-upon course of action for the Leios proposal in the Slack channel. * **Kevin:** Coordinate the offline vote on the revised remit and candidate questions, aiming for completion by the end of the week. * **Neil:** Provide any final suggestions for improving the revised remit document. * **All TSC Members:** Read the Leios proposal (CIP) to prepare for the technical discussion meetings. * **TSC:** Draft an ELI5-style summary of the Leios proposal for the community, highlighting trade-offs and differences from the original proposal. * **TSC:** Consider holding open workshops to discuss the Leios proposal with the community. * **TSC:** Inform the oversight committee about the potential change in direction for the Layos project. | Topic | Discussion | Notes | | ---------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Welcome & Opening | Sebastian noted his return after a two-week absence for health reasons. Kevin asked for any additions to the agenda, which was posted and pinned in the Slack channel. Nicolas noted he didn't see the agenda and thanked Kevin for re-sharing it. The agenda order was agreed upon. | The group acknowledged the return of Sebastian. The agenda was confirmed and pinned. | | Intersect Committee (ISC) Update | Kevin asked Lorenzo for an update from the ISC. Lorenzo stated the ISC was preparing a survey for members, to be run before November's voting. The survey aims to gather feedback on the work done so far and to guide future direction. Kevin noted that most of the ISC's recent discussion was on the remuneration policy. | Lorenzo reported on a planned member survey. The survey will assess past work and future direction. | | Revised Remit for Technical Steering Committee (TSC) | Kevin explained he had revised the TSC remit document based on earlier comments, including detailed feedback from Markus and Neil. He asked if they wanted their specific comments attached to the public version of the document or if they wanted to provide further commentary. Markus and Neil both indicated they didn't want a "minority report" but wanted to ensure their points were considered, especially regarding the setting of protocol parameters. | The revised TSC remit was discussed. Kevin clarified that Neil and Markus's comments were considered. | | Parameter Setting & TSC Remit | Neil raised a concern that the document might not fully address the "greatest potential for friction" in setting parameters for new protocol work. He highlighted the need for fair, evidence-based parameter settings. Sebastian agreed, emphasizing the group's collective experience in this area. Jonathan confirmed that the TSC's role would be to commission working groups to determine these settings, which would then be subject to a hard fork vote. | Neil expressed concern about the document's coverage of parameter setting. The group agreed that this is an important function for the TSC. | | Voting on Revised Remit | Lorenzo proposed a vote to approve the revised remit. Kevin initiated a vote, but Neil suggested postponing it to an offline process to allow all voting members (especially those not present, like Alex and Adam) to participate and ensure a unanimous proposal, which he felt would strengthen the legitimacy of the decision. Nicolas suggested a qualified majority vote might be sufficient, but Neil clarified he wanted everyone to have a chance to vote. Kevin agreed to move the vote offline and asked Neil to provide any final suggestions for improvements. | The vote on the revised remit was postponed to an offline process to allow for broader participation. | | Leios Explanation for Community | Nicolas and Neil provided a recap for Kevin, who was absent from the previous meeting. They discussed the need to create an "ELI5" (Explain Like I'm 5) or "ELI6" document for the community about the Layos proposal. The goal is to fairly explain the trade-offs and consequences of the technical choices, especially regarding the potential for increased latency in user transactions. Jonathan noted a concern about the marketing push for Leios potentially not highlighting these trade-offs prominently. | The group agreed to create an ELI5-style explanation of the Leios proposal for the community. The goal is to provide a balanced view of the trade-offs. | | Technical & Budgetary Aspects of Leios | Duncan and Sebastian discussed the technical implications of the proposed Leios CIP, specifically its non-concurrent linear variation and the potential for a "lost opportunity" to achieve a more scalable solution like sharding. Sebastian clarified that the proposal is a concrete technical document for feedback. Neil raised concerns about the legitimacy of the process, where a vague budget proposal could lead to a different deliverable. Marcus agreed, worrying about the precedent this sets for future proposals. | The discussion centered on the technical trade-offs in the Leios proposal versus the original promise, as well as the need for a transparent change management process. | | Process and Scrutiny | Nicolas and Ben debated whether the TSC should apply this level of scrutiny to every funded project. Ben argued that high-impact projects with significant scope changes, like Leios, warrant this level of scrutiny. Neil added that the TSC should focus its limited resources on "core" projects that have the biggest impact on the ecosystem. Nicolas requested a list of projects that will be subject to this level of review. Duncan agreed with prioritizing based on impact and making a conscious decision about which projects to scrutinize. | The committee discussed developing a formal process for reviewing projects with significant changes, prioritizing those with the largest impact on the ecosystem. | | Course of Action for Leios | Jonathan proposed that the TSC first hold technical meetings to discuss the Leios CIP. Following these meetings, they would draft an "info action" for DRep’s and the broader community, outlining the pros, cons, and differences from the original proposal. Kevin also suggested holding open workshops to engage the community directly. He also noted the importance of informing the oversight committee about the potential change in direction. | A plan was outlined to hold technical discussions, draft an informative report, and potentially conduct public workshops to engage the community on the Layos proposal. | | Chair Election Discussion | Kevin raised the topic of electing a new chair, as his and other members' terms are ending soon. He noted the importance of continuity. Jonathan pointed out that he and Adam are not seeking re-election, which makes a vote now potentially unrepresentative. The group agreed to postpone the chair election discussion until after the new members are elected. | The discussion on electing a new chair was postponed until after the upcoming elections to ensure the decision is made by the newly formed committee. |