DID WG Telco — Minutes
See also the Agenda and the IRC Log
Present: Justin Richer, Daniel Burnett, Brent Zundel, Manu Sporny, Adrian Gropper, Amy Guy, Eugeniu Rusu, Drummond Reed, identitiywoman, Jonathan Holt, Dave Longley, Markus Sabadello, Wayne Chang, Ganesh Annan
Regrets: Ivan Herman
Chair: Brent Zundel
Scribe(s): Daniel Burnett
- 1. agenda review
- 2. Introductions?
- 3. f2f stuff
- 4. PRs from manu (Justin, really)
- 5. core issue status check
1. agenda review
Brent Zundel: any changes to the agenda?
Manu Sporny: want to close some PRs, specifically justin’s open PRs.
Brent Zundel: right before our issue status check
Drummond Reed: I’m an editor of our key spec, for a loooong time now :)
… chief trust officer at Evernym
… have been working on DIDs for close to 4 years now
… also VCs and everything related. I present DAILY on the importance of DIDs. Let’s get it done!
Michael Jones: You should just pick up the pen and finish it, Drummond!
Brent Zundel: next topic call scheduled for this Thursday, June 16, noon EDT. Same zoom link but different irc channel. Topic will be metadata
… if time permits we will move on to key formats
3. f2f stuff
Brent Zundel: just completed a virtual f2f meeting. Several key topics, made good progress. Any comments or feedback on what went well, was missing, format of the meeting, etc.?
Manu Sporny: timing of the sessions was great. 90 minutes on one topic followed by a break was great. Felt very manageable. We could easily do 2 of those a year.
… not as bad as an all-day meeting.
… made good progress but have already forgotten what we discussed :)
… happy about general structure
Manu Sporny: +1 yes, meaningful use of time
Brent Zundel: was it a good use of our time?
… anyone who thought it wasn’t?
Dave Longley: +1 was productive
Drummond Reed: really thought the chunks of time helped
… hope remaining topic calls will be enough. Tomorrow’s feature freeze is also momentous.
Brent Zundel: Yes, feature freeze is TOMORROW.
… did anyone miss the f2f and needs info?
Markus Sabadello: I particularly remember dmitri’s session on the test suite. Well prepared and something we need to start working on. What are the next steps there?
Orie Steele: See the issues! https://github.com/w3c/did-test-suite/issues
Brent Zundel: yes, we will have a special topic call on the test suite. To be scheduled
… the repo exists (see Orie’s link above)
… if anyone has more to report or complaints, please email the chairs
4. PRs from manu (Justin, really)
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/pulls
Manu Sporny: justin, there are some old PRs we think we can close. Which ones do you think we can?
Justin Richer: go ahead and close all of them. They are as far as they will get.
Manu Sporny: some have to do with metadata. editors may raise a new PR around infra, but didn’t want to close yours wihout discussing.
Justin Richer: manage them as you see fit. Even if closed they are not gone. But do what you believe is appropriate.
Markus Sabadello: let’s keep them open at least until our special topic call this week.
Manu Sporny: let’s leave the complete one (with metadata), and add a new PR to compare/contrast
Markus Sabadello: others around contract can be closed. They have been addressed in some way (other than derefer]ncing)
Justin Richer: 299 has more content than 300. close 253, 295, 297, 298, and 300
Markus Sabadello: some of 253 hasn’t been incorporated. We could close it and add a new issue for dereferencing.
Manu Sporny: will leave it open for now
Justin Richer: on leaving 253 open, I didn’t touch deref in whole series because an objection was raised about the topic itself. if it showed up again it would need to be very different than whats’ in 253
… it has not been addressed yet, but 253 doesn’t do it and it’s not clear if we are even doing it.
Brent Zundel: so let’s open an issue for deref just to track the discussion?
Manu Sporny: there may already be one
Brent Zundel: we may not need to decide now. I trust the editors here to do the right thing.
5. core issue status check
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/176
Michael Jones: still on my todo list.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/85
Michael Jones: we should talk about this in the metadata call
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/203
Justin Richer: that’s the topic of the upcoming call.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/95
Justin Richer: we can close this.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/94
Brent Zundel: dan and I have a plan for this. we need to act on it
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/163
Drummond Reed: doing this as we go along, but final cleanup will be for CR
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/119
Brent Zundel: this is waiting on #92 and #291
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/291
Jonathan Holt: questions are about how it’s implemented. Has to do with did resolution. Which depends on info in DID document.
… three questions. Is there a questionnaire where I can submit what I have
… I’m not qualified to address the threat models
Brent Zundel: not aware of a form, just need to write them up. Can others help?
Jonathan Holt: these questions are about web browser security, in our case we have did browsers, so different.
Brent Zundel: may be helpful to look at VC privacy and security questionnaire info
… explains what does and doesn’t apply
… i will email link to jonathan
Jonathan Holt: we are effectively building a did browser.
Brent Zundel: but we are not defining resolution
Jonathan Holt: depends on how you implement the contract for a did browser
Brent Zundel: can you please add a comment here about the plan?
Manu Sporny: typically PING reviews require us to first talk about the spec itself, privacy issues in the core itself, then separately the broader ecosystem it fits into.
… with VCs most of the text was about pontificating on the broader ecosystem
… think about every response with both lenses: every feature in the spec by itself, then what happens when used in the broader ecosystem.
… it’s really only what’s in the spec that we can be forced to address. Because we can’t stop a determined adversary in the wild
Wayne Chang: would like to help here, jonathan.
Manu Sporny: +1 to wayne’s volunteering to work on it! :)
Adrian Gropper: also happy to help with PING questions
Jonathan Holt: will do, thanks!
Brent Zundel: the three of you should connect directly among yourselves at this point.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/58
Brent Zundel: no resolution yet, conversation ongoing
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/289
Orie Steele: close it
Dave Longley: we can close this. PR 312 resolved this. Orie agreed on the PR.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/269
Brent Zundel: conversation between kyle and joe. any update, joe?
Joe Andrieu: not much to report. With feature freeze this may get closed.
Brent Zundel: feature freeze doesn’t apply since already brought up
… maybe possibilities on what to do, but just waiting on kyle.
Joe Andrieu: will add a note asking if kyle has any more comments.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/23
Orie Steele: we discussed at f2f. making sure that you get support for popular formats out of the box. Still working on JOSE.
Brent Zundel: if the metadata conversation goes quickly we can move on to this in our topic call this week
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/205
Justin Richer: not aware of any movement on this. ignored still not fully defined. editors, has more happened here?
Manu Sporny: not yet
Justin Richer: needs to remain open until it’s clear in the spec
Michael Jones: not clear that needs to be expanded. already standard language in a bunch of IETF specs.
… not sure what else you want to say. it’s fine as is
Brent Zundel: please dis9cuss in issue
Dave Longley: others have commented on case where things need to be transformed. here we are supporting other formats. in that case may need to throw an error.
… need to handle ambiguity.
Brent Zundel: a PR would be helpful here
Michael Jones: throwing an error is not ignoring it. Otherwise you can’t do extenisions. If you comment in issue I’ll respond.
… you don’t throw an error when you ignore, you just ignore.
Dave Longley: made my comment in the issue now.
Brent Zundel: if anyone has specific text to resolve, please submit a PR
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/195
Orie Steele: we’ve had some discussion. different did methods handle this differently. May not be able to say more in the spec. I will add a comment to that effect. May not be a standard way.
Brent Zundel: please also note if you believe the issue can be closed.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/137
Markus Sabadello: lots of discussion on how params work. issue was about whether the specific params in the spec now are normative and must be supported.
… there are 4 right now in the spec and registries. Others have been proposed. Question still remains.
… is it okay to define resolution params without details on how resolution works
Manu Sporny: i will add to the issue that the language around the did params has been modified to get us all the way through rec as-is.
… we point to an internet-draft, for example.
… current weasel wording should be good enough. The question is whether we want the current wording or not.
Brent Zundel: all please review spec text and comment in issue if needed.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/325
Manu Sporny: we need to discuss as group. commenter is correct. we should talk about the r1 and k1 values. already in the issue.
… can be part of keys discussion. If not, those who care about r and k curves and expression as raw byte string, please comment in issue.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/72
Drummond Reed: it’s all about GDPR. Wrote comment in issue. Wants to wait until close to CR to write this because related info continues to evolve.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/327
Orie Steele: I got it to work. First time deref ever used for a package manager. It was basically an experiment and we can close the issue. By fixing the way DID params are referenced this now works.
… I will comment and close
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/332
Manu Sporny: +1 to this issue, I’d like to do this as soon as Gihub pages are fixed.
Manu Sporny: Thank you to brent for raising it :)
Brent Zundel: this is a relic of our vocab and github tooling. The tooling is changing such that we should be able to do this eventually without wrecking everyone’s work. We should wait until that point. I will make a comment and look forward to doing this.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/174
Michael Jones: no update. on my todo list.
Brent Zundel: related to metadata so may get resolved soon.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/118
Amy Guy: brent, same update, waiting for nearer to CR