W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > September 2021

Re: Mozilla Formally Objects to DID Core

From: Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2021 20:21:26 -0700
Message-ID: <CACrqygC76-NjSDqe-bBOSSPfjS7gAjLRm3b-Nw+pDGEy54PNig@mail.gmail.com>
To: Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com>
Cc: Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>, "W3C Credentials CG (Public List)" <public-credentials@w3.org>
On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 7:17 PM Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com> wrote:

> Can’t help but sympathise with the concern around the cacophony of DID
> methods

All I can say is the many examples of the success of architectures
leveraging multiple methods based on history history. In my case, Microsoft
would have blocked TLS if we (the TLS editors) didn't support their
Kerberos cypher suite, (a "method"). Which of course, no one used, and I
later heard from one of the engineers was known to be more market
positional than any technical reality.

But Microsoft would have bounced TLS and used their only embrace & extend
(effectively SSL 2.1) fork if we didn't accept Kerberos. There were also
many more ciphersuites that were never used except in POCs. I argued in TLS
1.3 that we should deprecate more of them by putting expiration dates on
them, and I also requested that we learn from that lesson and do the same
with DIDs, but there wasn't consensus for this.

My opinion is most DID methods will evolve or disappear as the market
matures. IMHO this is the whole reason why we elected to use methods in the
DID architecture in the first place. It also allows for innovation while
discouraging blocking.

-- Christopher Allen
Received on Thursday, 2 September 2021 03:23:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:25:22 UTC