- From: CCG Minutes Bot <minutes@w3c-ccg.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 22:06:31 +0000
Thanks to Our Robot Overlords for scribing this week! The transcript for the call is now available here: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2022-08-16-vcapi/ Full text of the discussion follows for W3C archival purposes. Audio of the meeting is available at the following location: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2022-08-16-vcapi/audio.ogg ---------------------------------------------------------------- VC API Task Force Transcript for 2022-08-16 Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2022Aug/0113.html Topics: 1. Relevant Community Updates 2. Status of Exchange Discovery PR 3. How are client features requested in VPR? 4. Background on OIDC4VCI 5. How VPR requests client features Organizer: Manu Sporny Scribe: Our Robot Overlords Present: Manu Sporny, Dave Longley, Joe Andrieu, Mike Varley, David Chadwick, Dmitri Zagidulin, Eric Schuh, Kerri Lemoie, TallTed // Ted Thibodeau (he/him) (OpenLinkSw.com), bengo Our Robot Overlords are scribing. Manu Sporny: Welcome everyone to the verifiable credentials API work item called This is August 16th 2022 today on our agenda. Manu Sporny: Is a just a review introductions relevant Community updates status of the exchange Discovery PR some like Varley heads up that we're going to ask you to give us an update there. Manu Sporny: How our client features requested so a question about intra and Inter protocol request for information this interact thing in the back and forth associated with it a discussion around terminology so renaming the app terminology to maybe coordinator it looks like there's there's a slight lean in that direction in the issue and then other issues as time permits are there any other. Manu Sporny: Changes to the agenda today. Manu Sporny: The other the other question we might want to explore is we've heard from at least three people that have said that they want to be on these calls but it's at a bad time for them so there's a question around asking if we if we asking the community group if people would prefer a different time so we could maybe put that out to the list as well so I'll put that on the agenda. Topic: Relevant Community Updates Manu Sporny: Each other here so we can skip introductions and reintroductions and go to relevant Community updates any relevant Community updates other than the standard rebooting is coming up please register w3c tpack is coming up please register and iiw is coming up in November in registered for that as well. Manu Sporny: Anything else that. Manu Sporny: I would like to announce. Manu Sporny: Okay that will do it for oh actually there's one more that is I'd see the matrial get Tina in a second chappie I/O so chappie now has the ability ability. <manu_sporny> chapi.io playground now has the ability to use different issuer back-ends that are powered by the VC Issuer API: https://playground.chapi.io/issuer Manu Sporny: Bility to use different issuer back ends that are powered by the VC API VC issue or API. <manu_sporny> We have added Mavennet as an implementer of the VC issuer and verifier API: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-api-issuer-test-suite/ Manu Sporny: I'll put that in the chat Channel and the other interesting piece of news is that getting another link we have another implementer of the VC issuer API we have added Maven Nets as an implementer of the DC issuer and verifier API. Manu Sporny: And that. Manu Sporny: Up to five active implementers that are implementing against the API. Dmitri Zagidulin: Does that list include DCR Cassidy. Manu Sporny: As not but we would love to have BCC in that list. Dmitri Zagidulin: Yeah please please on one of the early implementers. Manu Sporny: So Dimitri you put yourself on the cue and I do have a question for you on getting you in that in that go ahead. <kerri_lemoie> Plugfest 2: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-ed/plugfest-2-2022/ Dmitri Zagidulin: Right the other announcement is the day before IW the next jobs for the future interop Fest is going to be happening so this is plugfest to testing specifically issuing protocols so we're looking for either vendors that have implemented issuers or vendors that have been implemented credential wallets or both so there's a sign up form but you should sign. Dmitri Zagidulin: And point out which one you're implementing and which protocol into use so VC API is one of the three protocols that. Dmitri Zagidulin: We're expecting people to implement that we want to be testing against. Dmitri Zagidulin: So reminder for everybody if you haven't considered participating in jmf plugfest do consider. <kerri_lemoie> Registration Form: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdIhSjlJhLmi1Y_jV3q_7ywlHYP4rNCqQiY04CDUxwixHBNrA/viewform Dmitri Zagidulin: If you haven't filled out the registration form do fill it out and that's it. Manu Sporny: Awesome thank you Dimitri yes super important plugfest for this year it's the well I think one of the most important plug fests that's going on over the next year let me share window here just wanted to go back and show folks around a sure back end so in order to support the jff plugfest at least through the chappie interface. Manu Sporny: Is there's now this. Manu Sporny: Icon here in the top right and you can select the issuer's right now it's only digital bazaars v c JS front-end issuance thing that that has that happens there so for example you can click on an alumni credential and click generate verifiable credential in the proof here is generated by the web page through the vcg S application but the very next set of features that we're going to be releasing our the. Manu Sporny: The issuer back end so we will then. Manu Sporny: Allow selection of different issue or back ends that the credential can be issued through and then you can store that in the wallet there are also plans to do it off flow sorry decentralized identifier flow through this yes Dimitri go ahead. Dmitri Zagidulin: Okay so first of all that's really exciting I really like this UI and this is going to be useful in the plugfest as well my question is of course authentication as in as in does. Dmitri Zagidulin: Did you expect that chappie IO when handing off the request. Dmitri Zagidulin: To a particular issuer to have some sort of token authentication header or are we expecting it to be unlocked. Manu Sporny: Um let's see for did authentication there a couple of answers there right so did authentication see it's BP. Dmitri Zagidulin: 48 Sorry API authorization I should be this is. Manu Sporny: API authorization right now in the test Suite is either completely open so you do 20 authorization you can use oauth2 or you can use the Caps or the test Suite supports all three mechanisms today. Dmitri Zagidulin: Awesome thank you. Manu Sporny: The the so just kind of drilling to your question a bit more this is the latest VC API issuer test Suite run it runs every Sunday against everyone's live implementations as we can see here API catalogs and implementer Dan UTech digital bizarre Maven that insecure key and as you can see we're not all passing the tests initial bizarre is embarrassingly the worst compliant one. Manu Sporny: One on here. Manu Sporny: We have test Suites from what I remember API catalog uses oauth 2 digit bizarre uses oauth to Dan UTech I believe you're open right now Marcus Maven that is a loss to and I forget secure key like I don't know if you remember. Manu Sporny: Okay okay okay oh and I'm sorry I totally misspoke digital bazaars ecaps so we support both a lot to and Z caps clearly we're not expecting anybody else to support Z caps but we wanted to make sure that people knew that we have a delegated authorization based mechanism that does work against the API and we have implemented for that so all three forms. Manu Sporny: Read is that was that the. Dmitri Zagidulin: I guess I was hoping that at least I'll have to is supported it sounds like it is so we're good. Manu Sporny: Yeah absolutely yep yeah yeah we are yeah we're certainly I think we'll get knocked if we don't support you know at least oauth2 and then multiple forms so yeah we're I think we're good there the on the issue or side on the on the chappie side. Manu Sporny: Well anyway it don't worry it's going to be there if it's not there it's going to be there right in very short order and this is already a demonstration that we already have infrastructure that supports all three right okay all right so that's that and then the addition of Maven net was a happy thing this week the other thing about did on with the authentication that did authentication PR has been merged at this point Mike Farley we had. Manu Sporny: Rest number of your concerns there. Manu Sporny: And you know should this be an array of objects or not and Dmitry or concerns around should we have this P an object or not and so for both accepted methods and accept crypto sweets it isn't Ray of objects where each object at a minimum specifies like for did methods the method name in for crypto sweets the crypto sweet name. Manu Sporny: And that's it those were the. Manu Sporny: Talked about last week and those have been applied and things are there and in so then the question becomes you know in jmf. Manu Sporny: Are we. Manu Sporny: I think people did all through the VC API are we expecting them to did all the true chappie in that is probably something we should queue up for a conversation in the vce you call I don't know carry Dimitri are y'all planning on broaching that topic at some point in the future. Manu Sporny: Go ahead Carrie. Dmitri Zagidulin: Looks like Arizona. Kerri Lemoie: Hey at least I can ferment around but we're not requiring a specific type of data is only that it happens. Manu Sporny: Okay got it. Dmitri Zagidulin: And so we are expecting that the choice of protocol will dictate the data. Dmitri Zagidulin: Meaning if if this issue of the swallowed only works with BC API we expect that after that it supports chappie we expected all three champions. Manu Sporny: Got it okay so I think what we may plan to do is try to provide it through chappie the chappie playground and through VC API endpoint as well that does did all through the VC API in both mechanisms will use exactly the protocol defined in this VP request spec hopefully it's detailed enough at this point that people can Implement to it. <kerri_lemoie> That's a better clarification. Thanks, Dmitri Manu Sporny: Any other questions comments concerns before we move into the rest of the agenda. Topic: Status of Exchange Discovery PR Manu Sporny: All right thanks all mixed up status of exchange Discovery PR. Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/vc-api/pull/268 Manu Sporny: Mike this was I think adopted for merge meeting like everyone was cool with merging it I think we're still waiting on you to rebase any updates here. Manu Sporny: Yeah I'm trying to figure out if this is something that I can maybe do. Manu Sporny: Yeah something like that you see I so you basically you would go to can I jump to your. Manu Sporny: Yeah it has merge conflicts so there's just the merge conflicts need to be resolved and I'm happy to do that the next time I'm in the spec if that would be helpful to you I just didn't want to stop over anything you were doing. Manu Sporny: Things have not shifted now I think we're still in the same position so whatever you you know that what you outlined I think is where the group still is in and I think we're just looking for this to be merged right now as a heads up this exists implemented if you feel it's useful right okay all right so how about this if it's not merged by this weekend I will. Manu Sporny: Okay all right that sounds good so we discussed this on the 2020 28 call and it was decided that we will merge this PR by the following all and following weekend. Manu Sporny: Carly will preface and merge or any will do Burge. Manu Sporny: Okay alright so that's that item thank you for the update next. Topic: How are client features requested in VPR? Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/vc-api/issues/280 Manu Sporny: Our client features requested so this is issue 280. Manu Sporny: Um an issue to 80 let's see yeah this is a big one so the question is how. Manu Sporny: If it's so basically there are two ways to kind of discover what a client's capable of at least two that have been explodes explored so far it's the kind of oid see well known mechanism and the VC API kind of in protocol mechanism and to summarize them bluntly the oid see mechanism you know kind of publishing. Manu Sporny: She has all the. Manu Sporny: Alex of the digital wallet says I support did key and did web and these types of crypto sweets and these types of you know protocols right and that's published in a well known well known space so that's kind of the oid see approach and then the VP our approach is very much in band which is in band meaning like when you're doing a presentation. Manu Sporny: Change the. Manu Sporny: Verifier goes I need to know which did methods you support and you get a kind of a something back to say that and then it's might say I need to know whether or not your two-factor authentication right now and that happens kind of dynamically in the protocol flow itself in those are kind of the two approaches that have been suggested I think this one specifically has to do with VPR and if the BPR mechanism is is a. Manu Sporny: Useful one and I think we're going to. Manu Sporny: Spend a bit of time on the call today kind of comparing and contrasting I see Carrie and David on the Queue carries that an old Q or anyone. Kerri Lemoie: Sorry that's a little timid with myself. Manu Sporny: Okay sorry I didn't ask you go ahead David. Topic: Background on OIDC4VCI Manu Sporny: DavidC: For OIDC, it's recognized that not every wallet will be able to publish its metadata, so there is a default set of metadata that is being documented in the OIDC4VC specs, so you can assume wallet supports a certain set of metadata if you have no other way of finding out. Manu Sporny: That is just kind of like it's in the spec and so by default all wallets will support did key for example is that what you're saying. Manu Sporny: DavidC: There was a discussion at the meeting last week, whether default metadata is mandatory to implement or not. There was some disagreement about that. It's not been finally nailed down, Dmitri was at that meeting, perhaps he can recall more than I can. Dmitri Zagidulin: I do remember sorry I don't remember the conclusion was. Manu Sporny: DavidC: That's my recollection as well. Manu Sporny: Okay okay was anything I said did mischaracterize what idc's doing with with your additions David is that a proper characterization of what the IDC is kind of doing. Manu Sporny: DavidC: If there is a well known wallet that everyone uses, the manufacturer would publish... the software supplier, not the Holder, would publish metadata. Manu Sporny: Yeah okay in the in the kind of contrast that approach with what is in VPR for for example we can look at did authentication so this PR that just went into the VP R-Spec ass in line so there is no well let's see let me try and find a request. Manu Sporny: Kind of did all section to show how this this is a bit different I'll go too. Manu Sporny: More of a complex example so in the VP R-Spec the VC API once it you know you initiate an exchange one of the queries that can come in through the protocol is I need you to do did authentication in these are the in this is this is the verifier saying these are the accepted methods so I support did key and I support the ecdsa 2022 crypto sweet and I want you to sign over this Challenge and domain basically so this. Manu Sporny: Is an inline thing this. Manu Sporny: Not published on the on the web or the internet or anything like that it happens completely in line and the difference there of course is that it doesn't use well-known so you know chappie and other things like that use a manifest.json file for some basic things around the wallet but they don't express features and things that you know can be done in part of the reason that the at least. Manu Sporny: The BPR. Manu Sporny: Takes this approach is because sometimes what is supported is entirely dependent on what the holder has done in their wallet so for example if they don't have a let's say a did example didn't method registered then the wallet publishing through a static file that it supports did example doesn't really do any good in the actual protocol itself because. Manu Sporny: The individual to hold. Manu Sporny: Themselves have no way of doing a did example based exchange right so that's one of the one of the reasons that at least the VP R-Spec has made this design choice is because there's some questions about capabilities about wallet features that can't be answered on a generalized basis they have to be answered on a specific. Manu Sporny: Is another example of that is like whether or not the individual has to factored so a wallet may say this wallet is capable of doing two Factor authentication but whether or not the individual has actually turned on to factor or not is something that's very specific to the holder that's in charge of that wallet so again the the query for that feature comes in through the. Manu Sporny: Verifiable presentation. Manu Sporny: It is not something that can easily be just expressed you know publicly in a static file the finally the other thing is that there may be some features that the wallet or the holder don't want to publish publicly like the fact that you have a specific type of did method or that you support a specific type of did method from a holder perspective might not be something that you know they want to just kind of publish so that goes to the. Manu Sporny: The the the idea here. Manu Sporny: That you know it's been suggested that the client should publish its capabilities to the to the verifier but that leaks Privacy Information that leaks information that the holder may not want to expose to the verifier and so the verifier at least in VPR right now it's the verifier that says here's how I'd like you to engage with me and that's. Manu Sporny: Then the. Manu Sporny: With engagement from the holder goes okay of those mechanisms that the verifier supports this is the way I want to actually engage in that and go back and forth back and forth so let me stop there see if there any questions concerns comments. Manu Sporny: DavidC: As a comment, OpenID verification has a similar scheme, but uses the DIF PEv2 syntax, in that, they say what format they want VPs/VCs to be in. Feasible for Verifier to say different format, but VP to have JWT. Manu Sporny: DavidC: That is a dynamic request coming from verifier to wallet, using DIF PE. That is not something OIDC protocol has specified itself. That's an equivalent feature. Manu Sporny: Yeah that that yeah understood so basically you're saying that the diff presentation exchange has that feature but the OIDC stuff doesn't use diff presentation exchange is that right. Manu Sporny: Okay got it Mike you're on the Queue go ahead. Manu Sporny: DavidC: No, it's OIDC uses DIF PE. Mike Varley: So two things... static config can be used in OIDC... once the static config happens, then you can shift to dynamic PE-based mechanism. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] Manu Sporny: I had a hard time describing that David would you mind typing that in I think I followed what you were saying but it was a bit hard to follow. Manu Sporny: Hard to describe. <david_chadwick> In OIDC presentation, the RP is the client and the wallet is the OP/Authz server <david_chadwick> In OIDC Issuance the wallet is the client and the issuer is the OP and Authz server/RS Server Manu Sporny: So for all IDC for VC I am I understanding this correctly some of the capabilities are published through well-known file in the other capabilities can be discovered through presentation exchange for oid C4 VCI. Manu Sporny: DavidC: Credential manifest has been dropped in OIDC4VCI, just using snippets of it... display strings in different locales. Manu Sporny: Dave I think you're on the cue next it won't we. Dave Longley: So I think one of the differences between the protocols that we want to highlight here is that wallet identification and client identification is a hard requirements in using oid C4 R ECI whereas it is not a hard requirement using just be capr Ian and VPR so it allows for more data minimization for use cases where you don't need to know now what the. Dave Longley: My that's the difference that I think it's important to highlight. Manu Sporny: Go ahead David. Manu Sporny: DavidC: That difference isn't correct, in the pre-authorized flow, the issuer doesn't need to know who the client is. The pre-authorized flow, the user goes to the issuer's website, logs in, and then is displayed a QR Code which they scan into the wallet, then wallet contacts authorization server. In that case, authz server doesn't need to know the client -- they're authenticated via pre-authorization code that was given to them. Dave Longley: There is a read the redirection URL involved in that process though right. Manu Sporny: DavidC: You go to website, it's given a secret, and you're redirection. Dave Longley: And that redirection URL identifies the client. Manu Sporny: DavidC: The OIDC4VC doesn't state whether client ID needs to be present. Dave Longley: Does the does the perhaps you're saying the that that an authorization code Flows In some wall back to the to the client which implies that the authorization server there was there is an authorization server that the issuer is in uses in some way and the user must go to that authorization server and that is where the client is authenticated isn't that the case and it's like unified manner. Dave Longley: He has so that that's is. Dave Longley: So that's steps not necessary for the VC API. Manu Sporny: DavidC: Yes, that's the case. Manu Sporny: DavidC: That happens out of band, has a secret in it, sent to wallet, then wallet sends it to AZ. First time AZ talks to system, it has preauth request. Dmitri Zagidulin: Yes if I can jump in there if I can jump in there Dave the interesting part in that flow is that the user is authenticated but the wallet is not identified but while it just passes through a random string from the kip owed to the authorization server so. Dave Longley: I don't understand how they use your wood so there is the fact that there's an authorization server at all means that the issuer made some kind of choice around authorization and the user must go somewhere to authorize the client to to give it some kind of access to do something because that's how well that works and if that's the case it seems to me like the client absolutely needs to be identified to the authorization server and to the user where. Dave Longley: And that's where they make. Dave Longley: And an authorization code is generated. Manu Sporny: DavidC: Right, this is another interesting point -- who is the resource owner, that's who says "this client can acces smy resource". One can view resource owner as being the issuer, and it can revoke them, so client (user) comes to AZ with secret and says "can I have an access token" and AZ can ask itself if it wants to allow it. Manu Sporny: DavidC: Assumption was initially if user is resource owner, OP is giving the credential out. Dave Longley: Right and if that's the case the issuer is the party that's working with the authorization server and that means that the client must must authenticate itself in a must identify itself to that authorization server and that's that's the the distinction of drawing. Dave Longley: Yeah and my point is that in the VC API VPR approach the issuer can be totally blind if you did so desire you can they can be totally blind to the piece of software that the user is using so they don't have to know what wallet is is being used in the oid see flows it's a requirement because it's part of how the security and authorization server works. Dave Longley: But you're taken to an authorization server where you approve what wallet that is which means that it knows what the wallet it. Dave Longley: Just by definition. Manu Sporny: DavidC: It's the user that's authenticated, but the wallet Dmitri Zagidulin: So it's essentially introducing another type of authorization server that doesn't need to identify the client. Dmitri Zagidulin: Yeah so you're up. Dave Longley: If it doesn't need to be to identify the client it does that what does that mean about the user knowing which piece of software they're using. Dave Longley: Is there an allow screen where they approve that piece of software that they're using. Manu Sporny: DavidC: If they're using cross-device flow, QR Code shown on issuers website, user takes smartphone, enters wallet of their own choosing, selects a wallet. Dave Longley: Sure and then after that the wallet makes a call right to the authorization server. Dmitri Zagidulin: So it's finding its using the limitation of mobile operating system it's turning the bug into a feature it's using the fact that you have to select your wallet instead of the allow screen the traditional off to does Sonic sense so how does the user know what software they're driving it's because they opened it and click to scan QR code in that software. Dmitri Zagidulin: So the the permissions implicit. Dave Longley: But I'm so once they're in their wallet they scan the QR code with their wallet and and does does the wallet ever redirect them back to an authorization server where they see an allow page and approve that wallet for use at the issuer. Dave Longley: That's fair that's very interesting okay. Dave Longley: I'm very curious to know more about that. Dmitri Zagidulin: https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-4-verifiable-credential-issuance-1_0-05.html#section-7 <dmitriz> @dave ^ Dave Longley: So from that qr-code. Dave Longley: Right so so if the user chooses any application through any means of their own and then scans the QR code it just immediately goes to the wallet and there's no additional step. Dave Longley: Is that right okay. Manu Sporny: DavidC: That's right Manu Sporny: DavidC: If you can't scan QR Code, ther eis a URL link -- deep link, custom scheme, that will be redirected via deep link to wallet. That will be configured inside users machine, if it's openid, that wallet will get to scheme. Dave Longley: This is all very interesting but we do have a Q so I'm not going to say any more at this time. Manu Sporny: Go ahead and like. Mike Varley: The pre-auth is done w/ DIF-WACI like flow -- user interacts w/ website, there is a bearer token that's passed across to engage the wallet. The assumption is whoever picks that up/makes call, gets that VC -- similar to CHAPI, whoever knows the secret can pick up the credential. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] Mike Varley: There is no client authentication at that point. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] Dave Longley: You're on the kitty litter. Manu Sporny: Go ahead well yeah I'm I'm yeah I'm I'm confused because I was I thought there were no use of Bearer tokens in the oid c4v ci-flow and now I'm here that there are the one of the one of the criticisms against chappie and the VC API was that the URL passed over was Bear token and now I think I'm I think I'm hearing that. Manu Sporny: It's the same exact thing you know I. Manu Sporny: For VCI that approach I'm so I'm confused but maybe sure. Mike Varley: You are absolutely correct, the pre-auth code flow is what we were doing w/ CHAPI flow and WACI flow and is subject to same challenges/security vulnerabilities/checks ... but it is an option in the OIDC flow. The other option is you go through full authorization code flow -- OIDC has many forks, pre-auth flow now exists as well... authorized code flow is valid ... bearer token flow, pre-auth was state of the art year/year ago -- get QR Code wallet does the rest. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] Dave Longley: I don't know if I'm jumping Q should I talk now. Manu Sporny: You are jumping to David's next and then you're after oh sorry go ahead then. Dave Longley: No I got kicked off the queue I think it's all right okay I'll just be quick okay that's thank you Mike that's interesting it looks like there's potentially multiple ways that you can implement the oid see for me ci-flow I don't know if that's a change in what has happened or not and I would like to know since David's coming up on the Queue if that choice was made to help address the problem that wall. Dave Longley: It's were forced to. Dave Longley: Because that is one reason that the design was the way it was with VC API in VPR. Manu Sporny: DavidC: I can't answer the question, only started working on OIDC when group was already under way. Two points -- every OAuth code uses bearer tokens, you're not escaping bearer tokens -- pre-auth has MFA, so when user scans in QR Code, if issuer wants multifactor, it can ask for a PIN, send PIN to user via SMS, then wallet when it gets QR Code will pop up window to enter PIN then send PIN and secret to authz server. Manu Sporny: All right queue is empty um. Manu Sporny: Where to go from here. Topic: How VPR requests client features Manu Sporny: Yeah go ahead Mike. Mike Varley: Ok, so we talked a bit about OIDC, VPR does inline stuff... seems like engotiation /discovery of capabilities is met by this VPR feature - is that the goal? [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] Manu Sporny: Yeah I think fundamentally the the VC the VP R-Spec specifically has one way of doing this so it doesn't branch in the variety of different ways that you know oh I DC might Branch the feature Discovery mechanism is purely in Channel and is purely through the delivery of verifiable. Manu Sporny: Every feature is delivered as a verifiable credential. Right I don't know if anyone else wants to you know comment to that but that's effectively the design here is that there's no branching there's no it can happen this way or that way or this other way it's purely the VC API sorry the VC API with VP are all capabilities are in Channel. Manu Sporny: Protected not. Manu Sporny: Public and and can go you know back and forth so that's it. Mike Varley: We have discovery for API endpoints for protocol/exchange... client can call discovery endpoint and based on that can understand protocol, if VPR protocol, then inband it can expect to see "capabilities request/statement" which it can then meet or not. Particular methods/cryptosuites it can't meet, then ok, end of story. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] Mike Varley: This sufficiently answers discovery/negotiation requirement that comes up in open world. Are there gaps here? [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] Manu Sporny: Like go ahead David. Manu Sporny: DavidC: The gap that I see, I'm on my browser, connect to RPs website, has login button, widget, etc... it doesn't know whether my wallet talks OpenID for VC / VP -- we need something at the super protocol level that allows both parties to determine which protocol. That to me is the missing gap. <dave_longley> VPR can include multiple interact URLs, one with OIDC4VCI and one with VC-API Dmitri Zagidulin: I think what what would David what would David wish list item is that for example there's a wallet selector with a protocol field so like if the chappie mediator is extended to say all right please before this request and by the way I'd like. Dmitri Zagidulin: To talk to. Dmitri Zagidulin: Bird calls that speak this API or I'd like to talk to all at speak opening to connect. Manu Sporny: Go ahead Longley and and we we've got three minutes left in the call will have to wrap up after this comment go ahead. Mike Varley: +1 David, the client and server have to have a shared starting point... or a meta-method to figure that out. Dave Longley: Yeah I was going to say I think we're actually two minutes over because we want the w3c calls to end five before but just real quick yes to what to meet you said that is one approach the problem the other thing I highlighted in chat is VPR lets you send multiple interact URLs and you could send if the server supports both oid c4v CI + VC API that can send two different URLs and let the client choose which one they want to use. Manu Sporny: Yep and that's already supported in the BP R-Spec and and there's discussion about supporting this stuff in the in the chappie wallet selector as well so we've got two two mechanisms that could be utilized to do this in VPR and in in chappie okay that's the call for today I'll try to get these minutes out I've been bad about minutes for the past three weeks so I'll try to get all this published in hopefully today. Manu Sporny: Give everyone for the Lively call. Manu Sporny: I think Mike said it best I don't know if anyone feels that you know there's anything more to say about how feature detection Works in VPR at least there's just one way that it works the end okay so next week do we want to talk about the test Suites and testing we said we were going to do. Manu Sporny: But I'm at a bit of a loss as to how to have that conversation other than just going through you know the test seats test Suites for the VC API stuff any thoughts or preferences there or do we just want to do it more issue processing. <mike_varley> unfortunately I will miss next week <mike_varley> thanks all Manu Sporny: Alright I'll send that question to the list and or just make a judgment call all right thanks everyone for the call today we'll see y'all next week. <kerri_lemoie> Thanks!
Received on Tuesday, 16 August 2022 22:06:31 UTC