Re: Verifiable Requests?

Daniel, How would PE work with GNAP?

- Adrian

On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 6:48 PM Daniel Buchner <Daniel.Buchner@microsoft.com>
wrote:

> Just wanted to clarify something I noticed that Manu said:
>
> “There may be many different protocols for requesting a VC. Some of the
> protocols are very simple, like the Query By Example mechanism that many
> companies used to achieve multi-way interop last spring via CHAPI. Others
> are more complex, like the DIF Presentation Request specification.”
>
> The DIF spec in question is called Presentation *Exchange*, and it is also
> just a data model specification, not a credential request/response envelope
> protocol – in fact, the entire concept is that you can use PE objects
> *inside* any envelope protocol for credential request/response (OIDC SIOP,
> CHAPI, DIDComm, etc.). PE is like the Borg: it boards your
> envelope-protocol-ship, assimilates everything related to specifying what
> credentials a Verifier is demanding + how a Holder evaluates what they have
> in fulfillment of those demands, and basically turns the outer envelope
> protocol into a dumb drone so you can reuse the exact same
> Verifier-demand/Holder-evaluation code across all envelop protocol options
> (OIDC SIOP, CHAPI, DIDComm, etc.). Join the Borg, write less code,
> resistance is futile.  :smiley-borg-face:
>
>
>
> What Gabe seems to want is something that has replay protection and other
> features that OIDC SIOP, DIDComm, and various req/res envelope protocols
> define – the Presentation Exchange spec has no stake in this, as it doesn’t
> care what you pick and will happily assimilate whatever envelop protocol
> bodies you inject its objects into. The answer could be ‘Just use one of
> the existing envelope porotocols’ or ‘Someone could make a new thing that
> looks VP/VC-ish’, and I think he is proposing the latter, but would
> appreciate feedback on what others think before doing anything further.
>
>
>
> - Daniel
>