14:01:29 RRSAgent has joined #did 14:01:29 logging to https://www.w3.org/2020/10/13-did-irc 14:01:32 RRSAgent, make logs Public 14:01:32 please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), ivan 14:01:53 Meeting: DID WG Telco 14:01:53 Chair: brent 14:01:53 Date: 2020-10-13 14:01:53 Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-did-wg/2020Oct/0005.html 14:01:53 ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2020-10-13: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-did-wg/2020Oct/0005.html 14:01:54 Regrets+ 14:41:18 dmitriz has joined #did 15:00:08 JamesQU has joined #did 15:00:24 Eugeniu_Rusu has joined #did 15:01:10 justin_r has joined #did 15:01:24 present+ 15:01:34 JoeAndrieu has joined #did 15:01:39 present+ 15:02:02 markus_sabadello has joined #did 15:02:12 present+ 15:02:13 present+ 15:02:14 present+ 15:02:21 present+ 15:02:23 shigeya has joined #did 15:02:44 jonathan_holt has joined #did 15:02:56 present+ jonathan_holt 15:03:06 Alan has joined #did 15:03:09 shigeya_ has joined #did 15:03:12 mlagally has joined #did 15:03:12 ktoumura has joined #did 15:03:15 present+ 15:03:15 present+ 15:03:15 present+ 15:03:28 zkis has joined #did 15:03:30 present+ 15:03:31 hazel_ has joined #did 15:03:40 kaz has joined #did 15:03:48 present+ Shigeya Suzuki 15:03:56 present+ Michael_McCool 15:04:12 present+ 15:04:39 present+ 15:04:45 present+ Kaz_Ashimura 15:04:47 present+ Kunihiko_Toumura 15:04:49 present+ 15:04:51 zakim, who is here? 15:04:51 Present: rhiaro, JoeAndrieu, justin_r, markus_sabadello, JamesQU, ivan, jonathan_holt, manu, dmitriz, wayne, Alan, Shigeya, Suzuki, Michael_McCool, brent, Eugeniu_Rusu, 15:04:55 ... Kaz_Ashimura, Kunihiko_Toumura, mlagally 15:04:55 On IRC I see kaz, hazel_, zkis, ktoumura, mlagally, shigeya_, Alan, jonathan_holt, shigeya, markus_sabadello, JoeAndrieu, justin_r, Eugeniu_Rusu, JamesQU, dmitriz, RRSAgent, Zakim, 15:04:55 ... tzviya, ivan, faceface, dlehn, brent, ChristopherA, deiu26, Travis_, bigbluehat, manu, dlongley, wayne, rhiaro 15:05:01 present+ Michael_Lagally 15:05:08 present- Shigeya Suzuki 15:05:12 present+ Shigeya_Suzuki 15:05:13 Present+ Zoltan_Kis 15:05:29 Present+ Shigeya_Suzuki 15:05:37 present+ 15:05:48 phila_ has joined #did 15:05:56 present+ 15:06:01 present+ brent 15:06:14 Orie has joined #did 15:06:14 zakim, who is here? 15:06:14 Present: rhiaro, JoeAndrieu, justin_r, markus_sabadello, JamesQU, ivan, jonathan_holt, manu, dmitriz, wayne, Alan, Michael_McCool, brent, Eugeniu_Rusu, Kaz_Ashimura, 15:06:18 ... Kunihiko_Toumura, mlagally, Michael_Lagally, Shigeya_Suzuki, Zoltan_Kis, dlongley 15:06:18 On IRC I see Orie, phila_, kaz, hazel_, zkis, ktoumura, mlagally, shigeya_, Alan, jonathan_holt, shigeya, markus_sabadello, JoeAndrieu, justin_r, Eugeniu_Rusu, JamesQU, dmitriz, 15:06:18 ... RRSAgent, Zakim, tzviya, ivan, faceface, dlehn, brent, ChristopherA, deiu26, Travis_, bigbluehat, manu, dlongley, wayne, rhiaro 15:06:25 present+ 15:06:54 McCool has joined #did 15:07:12 https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/PRESENTATIONS/2020-10-joint-wot-did 15:07:46 scribe+ 15:07:55 scribejs, set McCool Michael McCool 15:08:09 Topic: Greatings to WoT WG 15:08:39 drummond has joined #did 15:08:44 brent: special topic call on unregistered properties 15:08:53 present+ 15:09:14 McCool: We'll be reviewing WoT and the issue tracker... I will share my screen and present. 15:09:45 ... WoT is looking at enhancing IoT 15:10:00 ... we are focusing on interoperability, not vertical stacks 15:10:25 ... we are looking at ways to describe how things operate and describing them with metadata rather than prescribing how they should 15:10:52 ... we are 2nd round of charter, we released a Thing description, looking at updated to that and updates to overall arch. 15:11:04 ... we are looking at discovery, related to how to access metadata. 15:11:21 ... we are also looking at use cases, and narrowing scope 15:11:37 ... Thing Description is metadata about an IoT device, using JSON-LD 1.1 15:11:50 pam has joined #did 15:11:56 ... it includes information about network interactions, it supports protocol bindings, beyond HTTP 15:12:20 ... it also supports schemas, such as JSON Schemas... but its also mapped to other types such as XML and CBOR. 15:12:39 pam_ has joined #did 15:12:39 ... we are also looking at semantic annotation, looking an defining ontologies 15:12:44 rrsagent, make log public 15:12:48 rragent, draft minutes 15:12:54 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:12:54 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/10/13-did-minutes.html kaz 15:12:57 s/rragent, draft minutes// 15:13:05 ... in 2.0 we are looking at things that might overlap with DID... including JSON-LD Proofs, signing. 15:13:19 ... we would like to include the ability to sign the documents. 15:13:34 ... there are various security issues related to discovery. 15:13:51 ... arch, we are looking at lifecycle and interop profiles and discovery 15:13:54 present+ Alan_Bird 15:14:05 ... once I have a TD, how can i use it 15:14:19 present+ Sebastian_Kaebisch 15:14:24 ... discovery is 2 phase approach: introductions and detailed exploration. 15:14:34 ... the idea is that you must auth before you can get metadata 15:14:40 present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi 15:14:45 ... first contact protocol starts with a URL 15:15:04 ... we look at retrieving a TD directly from a device or via a directory service 15:15:21 ... we are looking at DIDs as one of several first contact protocol options 15:15:43 ... we would resolve a DID and follow a link to a device or a directory service 15:15:48 q+ when it is appropriate to ask questions to ask about key representations 15:16:05 chriswinc has joined #did 15:16:06 ... because a DID Document has types, we have ways of telling the difference between a directory or device. 15:16:12 q+ to ask when it is appropriate to ask questions to ask about key representations 15:16:13 present+ 15:16:15 ... we can also support URLs 15:16:35 ... for DIDs, we want to define 2 types, general type for WoT and directory 15:17:02 present+ identitywoman 15:17:03 ... we have strong sec requirement... we don't want to leak any data assided form the URL 15:17:19 ... we can talk more about discovery, or dive into issues. 15:17:23 ack jonathan_holt 15:17:23 jonathan_holt, you wanted to ask when it is appropriate to ask questions to ask about key representations 15:17:38 jonathan_holt: interested in key representation regarding JWK / CWK 15:17:52 ... seems like they settled on vanilla string representations, thoughts? 15:18:12 McCool: for the directory service we are looking at HTTP, so its not contrained. 15:18:25 ... however p2p is harder, because devices may be constrained. 15:18:38 ... we may recommend that P2P can only be done on HTTP 15:18:49 Mizushima has joined #did 15:18:58 present+ burn 15:18:59 ... we have not gotten all the way there, with http we have local network, home gateway, etc... 15:19:09 ... we are also interested in distributed certs' 15:19:21 ... short term, we want to solve HTTP first. 15:20:07 ... right now, we are looking at HTTPS, and we are interested in local HTTPS with other certs... we wish someone would solve this 15:20:16 ... right now, we have to assume HTTPS 15:20:26 jonathan_holt: SDX ??? 15:20:40 q? 15:20:41 McCool: we assume HTTPS, and we are not defining how you got it 15:20:42 SXG 15:20:44 q+ 15:20:54 present+ dezell 15:20:59 present+ pam 15:21:10 dezell has joined #did 15:21:12 McCool: I have a presentation on discovery, there are phases of introduction 15:21:16 https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2018/11/signed-exchanges 15:21:25 ... we need to have exploration after auth 15:21:52 ... another constraint is that we want it to be global, and don't want to be constrained to local network. 15:22:09 ... maybe certs could go in a DID Doc? 15:22:34 ... final thing, we are also looking at geospatial queries 15:22:42 ... we want to discover based on location 15:23:01 ... unfortunately there is not introduction mechanism that supports location. 15:23:03 burn has joined #did 15:23:10 ... we are adding geo filters to directory 15:23:40 ... regarding JSON-LD Proofs, we might add or modify directory content, and we would want to chain proofing if modifications happen. 15:23:57 ... lets go to the issue tracker 15:24:03 ack manu 15:24:21 manu: one potential solution is the use of Verifiable Credentials 15:24:48 ... high level, DIDs may not be the best solution, and VCs might be a better solution for directory services 15:24:58 ... it might be simpler than using a DID to use VCs 15:25:24 ... there are constrained DID Methods, like did:key that might do really well in constrained environments 15:25:41 ... you could use did:key in constrained environments to do auth 15:26:09 McCool: if we do use DIDs for introductions, we would probably take a subset of DID Methods 15:26:23 ... we are interested in hashing / normalization in TDs 15:26:37 present+ 15:26:39 manu: lets give an update on the DID WG 15:26:49 ... the core spec is now called "DID Core" 15:27:03 ... we focus on authentication and verification of credentials 15:27:19 ... we have an ADM which supports JSON-LD and CBOR, and JSON 15:27:33 ... we have services which might support directories 15:27:44 ... we are getting ready to transition to CR soon. 15:28:05 ... we won't be adding anything new at this point, we don't see a need for it. 15:28:32 ... you can use type links as the extensibility mechanism for your use case 15:28:34 present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima 15:28:36 present+ phila 15:28:50 McCool: interested in recommended methods for a use case / demo 15:29:01 manu: did:key would be a good place to start 15:29:23 ... there is overlap between WoT, VC and DID regarding cryptographic proofing and JSON-LD. 15:29:38 ... there are options there which should address your use case 15:29:47 q? 15:30:01 ... everything from thing descriptions with proofs, wrapping TDs in VCs, and publishing TDs in registries. 15:30:22 ... a number of foundational components that all these groups are using, especially RDF dataset normalization 15:30:30 ... markus was going to cover disovery 15:30:59 markus: thanks for the intro and presentation, we've looked at your open issues, and have some bullet points to discuss 15:31:12 ... you seem to have covered most of the focus points in your intro 15:31:35 ... discovery: we understand you are interested in using DIDs and service endpoints. 15:31:53 ... did documents can be extended, so additional service types can be added. 15:32:16 ... did core spec, we have an open topic on discussing a type property of the did subject 15:32:33 ... so the did subject could be a thing, and additional document could be added. 15:32:51 ... but as i understand your metadata concerns, that would not be a good idea necessarily 15:33:14 McCool: we think DID is good for introduction from a sec perspective. 15:33:32 ... we want to consolidate where security happens, we are generally cautious about leaking meta data 15:33:50 q+ to suggest "type" makes more sense as the service endpoint level, not the DID 15:33:53 ... we have links and relation types, we are wondering which kind of relation types might be observable 15:34:17 ... if we are linking to the same kind of things, it would be awesome to define a set of link relation types 15:34:23 ack JoeAndrieu 15:34:23 JoeAndrieu, you wanted to suggest "type" makes more sense as the service endpoint level, not the DID 15:34:46 dape has joined #did 15:34:47 joe: I think the use case you are describing, use the type of the service endpoint 15:35:04 McCool: we are interested in putting the type in the link 15:35:19 ... its helpful to know the type before you retrieve 15:35:27 ... from a perf perspective 15:35:30 q+ 15:35:37 ... knowing its a device or directory is not really an issue 15:35:46 ... but we are worried about fingerprinting 15:36:06 ... we are worried about randomizing URLs, and fingerprinting location from metadata 15:36:28 manu: privacy is a big topic of debate, because dids can refer to people 15:36:43 ... the same thing we use to protect people, could be used to protect WoT 15:36:56 McCool: privacy concerns are metadata level 15:37:11 ... we are concerned that metadata can be used to infer properties of people 15:37:26 ... for example, diabetes devices imply person with diabetes 15:37:29 ack markus_sabadello 15:37:44 Alan has left #did 15:37:59 markus_sabadello: type of the subject is one potential extension point, but it makes sense to also use the service type 15:38:11 ... also we usually thing of did resolution as not requiring authentication 15:38:24 ... regarding service types for TDs and Directories 15:38:38 ... do you already have some kind of relation type you use? 15:38:50 q+ to go through the rest of the presentation 15:38:52 McCool: we have looked at DNS SD, and defined some service types for that 15:39:13 ... basically WoT Thing and WoT Thing Directory (2 types) 15:39:29 ack manu 15:39:29 ... we don't have subtypes for types of things, because of concern exposing that. 15:39:29 manu, you wanted to go through the rest of the presentation 15:39:46 present + 15:39:57 markus_sabadello: did resolution is not defined concretly... only abstractly 15:40:35 ... in some cases this can be simple, in the case of did:key makes not network requests 15:40:52 ... all methods have concrete resolution, but some resolution requires running a blockchain node 15:41:09 manu: moving on to security issues 15:41:25 ... issue 166 on WoT regarding integrity protection and proof on the did document 15:41:49 ... we removed it because many methods have ledger specific protection mechanism 15:42:03 ... there are methods like did:web, which may still use the proof property 15:42:16 McCool: we deferred proofing to 2.0 15:42:37 ... we are wondering if we are signing information or syntactic expression. 15:43:11 manu: have you considered VCs? we covered this, you should look at it.... did:key is ideal for constrained environments with no network access. 15:43:23 ... its simpler it implement 15:43:52 ... CBOR-LD supports semantic compression on did documents, a did doc can go down to 450 bytes when signed 15:44:07 ... in CBOR-LD you can stay in binary, and avoid JSON parsers. 15:44:27 ... its also possible to construct any LD Proof so that you don't need to normalization 15:44:49 sebastian has joined #did 15:44:49 ... you can using string templating, to avoid normalization if you use CBOR and string templating. 15:44:57 q+ 15:45:09 ... CBOR-LD is brand new and ongoing 15:45:18 McCool: we are interested in that regarding TDs 15:45:19 scribejs, set sebastian Sebastian Kaebisch 15:45:36 ... TDs can be so long they exceed packet size. 15:45:42 Could somebody describe what it means to be "semantically compressed"? 15:46:03 manu: we see folks doing this in the wild, using hand crafting toolkit 15:46:13 ... lets go the Q 15:46:15 pam_, compression based on the meaning of the data instead of compression based on simply its shape/general patterns 15:46:18 ack sebastian 15:46:30 Sebastian: interested regarding CBOR-LD, any documentation? 15:46:31 i|moving on to|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-security/issues/166 wot-security issue 166| 15:46:46 ... we are interested in compressed thing descriptions 15:47:06 pam_, you can get much better compression ratios when you have a "dictionary" (enables semantic compression) of what things mean vs. running generalized compression algorithms that have no understanding of what is being compressed 15:47:08 manu: its brand new and experimental, there is a presentation deck, and some tests and examples 15:47:22 ... will provide a presentation on JSON-LD compression in CBOR 15:47:29 ... the spec is beyond rough 15:47:36 pam_, and JSON-LD has a "@context" that can be reused as a compression dictionary, enabling CBOR-LD to have semantic compression. 15:47:39 ... it will probably only be useful in 18 months for so 15:47:52 Wot-DID slide deck: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1NWm50ihWGvPzLeqeqNO3roaDLyH5RFD6n8a4ddca2kY/edit# 15:48:10 CBOR-LD slide deck: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1ksh-gUdjJJwDpdleasvs9aRXEmeRvqhkVWqeitx5ZAE/edit 15:48:10 McCool: we have addressed a lot of these issues 15:48:24 ... type links, need to review extension mechanism 15:48:32 ... need to look at signing and VCs 15:48:45 ... we think LD Proofs are not ready for adoption 15:49:05 ... i'd like to capture some issues we can follow up on 15:49:20 Thanks @dlongley that is very helpful 15:49:23 ... we need to narrow down a set of methods 15:49:51 manu: see the 65 examples in did spec registries 15:50:05 McCool: we support URL based introductions 15:50:20 ... as long as we can use a DID to get to a URL, we are good 15:50:34 ... did:key seems useful 15:50:58 q+ 15:51:30 manu: did:key has downsides, its so simple, and ideal for local constrained env... what did key does not have is key rotation, which is ok as long as you have hardware isolation 15:52:03 ... its possible that IoT can use did:key and rely on organizations to use other did methods to issue TDs or Directories. 15:52:13 present+ Erich_Bremer 15:52:29 McCool: we are interested in doing identifier rotation 15:52:51 ... we want to support identifier rotation to prevent tracking 15:53:24 q? 15:53:25 McCool: there are cases where TDs are public, for example smart city 15:53:32 ... you have have parking meter payments 15:54:00 ... more public use cases, you may not have personal information intermixed with devices 15:54:14 ack jonathan_holt 15:54:21 jonathan_holt: still wondering regarding did:key 15:54:36 ... interested in discovery via QUIC 15:55:09 McCool: we are interested in other protocols beyond TCP/HTTP 15:55:26 ... quick is of interested, we are just not sure it aligns with timeline... we still will need an HTTP version 15:55:32 ... maybe QUIC is 2.0 15:55:58 jonathan_holt: is QUIC HTTP/3 ? 15:56:15 manu: parts of it are pulled 15:56:43 McCool: obviously if its a standard, its easier for us to use 15:56:46 q? 15:56:52 q+ 15:57:11 speaker? 15:57:39 ack kaz 15:57:41 sorry didn't get that question 15:57:52 kaz: asks something regarding group note 15:58:11 McCool: see you on the issue tracker 15:58:18 present+ 15:58:21 zakim, end meeting 15:58:22 As of this point the attendees have been rhiaro, JoeAndrieu, justin_r, markus_sabadello, JamesQU, ivan, jonathan_holt, manu, dmitriz, wayne, Alan, Shigeya, Suzuki, Michael_McCool, 15:58:22 ... brent, Eugeniu_Rusu, Kaz_Ashimura, Kunihiko_Toumura, mlagally, Michael_Lagally, Shigeya_Suzuki, Zoltan_Kis, dlongley, Orie, drummond, Alan_Bird, Sebastian_Kaebisch, 15:58:22 ... Cristiano_Aguzzi, chriswinc, identitywoman, burn, dezell, pam, Tomoaki_Mizushima, phila, Erich_Bremer, phila_ 15:58:26 JoeAndrieu has left #did 15:58:26 thanks by all 15:58:27 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 15:58:27 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/10/13-did-minutes.html Zakim 15:58:27 I am happy to have been of service, ivan; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 15:58:32 kaz: just fyi, regarding the registries note, Florian from AB will make a presentation during the AC meeting on Oct 20 on the new proposal for the process 2021 15:58:32 Zakim has left #did 15:58:37 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:58:37 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/10/13-did-minutes.html kaz 15:59:54 rrsagent, bye 15:59:54 I see no action items