Re: Introducing the DID DHT Method

Although I see upgrading of static keys to a more dynamic method as a
desirable trait the proposed approach gives me hesitations. I don't think
an identifier should ever turn from static to dynamic as this introduces
severe interoperability concerns..
- Is this did:key the static one or has it been upgraded?
- Was it upgraded on did:dht or
did:another-method-that-has-similar-upgradability-pattern?
- Is this fork A or B of did:key:z...

In general though, this method is great. I look forward to playing with it.
Thanks Gabe!

On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 2:25 PM Gabe Cohen <gabe@tbd.email> wrote:

> Steve,
>
> Definitely — you can find some comparison of IPFS and Mainline DHT here
> <https://github.com/Nuhvi/pkarr/issues/5#issuecomment-1701608315>. My
> condensed reasoning is that Mainline is more distributed, performant, and
> has significantly more real world usage than IPFS.
>
> I spent some time looking at (and trying to implemented…) IPID DID method
> <https://did-ipid.github.io/ipid-did-method/>. It is quite old and in
> need of an update; I had a hard time implementing it properly and I’m
> curious if there is anyone actually using it. I reached out to the original
> author but that conversation didn’t really go anywhere. Conceptually IPID
> is similar to DID DHT. There are some minor differences, such as Mainline
> only supporting Ed25519 (IPLD supports RSA and some others too), and limits
> on file size (1KB on Mainline), which I think is a good thing for
> decentralization (see: block size wars).
>
> One of the most promising aspects, I believe, for did:dht is
> interoperability and upgradability of existing methods like did:key and
> did:jwk, which we’ve started to profile here
> <https://did-dht.com/registry/#interoperable-did-methods>. Authors of
> both specifications are amenable to this functionality, which I believe
> could result in near-term wide-spread adoption of the method.
>
> Gabe
>
> On Dec 11, 2023 at 1:55:51 PM, Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi gabe
>>
>> Well at least it’s not another me-too cryptocurrency Ponzi scheme ;)
>>
>> I like the idea of DHTs as a decentralised resource discovery mechanism
>>
>> Would you care to offer some comparisons / advantages / disadvantages
>> over the IPLD did method?
>>
>> Steven Capell
>> Mob: 0410 437854
>>
>> On 12 Dec 2023, at 4:23 am, Gabe Cohen <gabe@tbd.email> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Cross-posting from the DID WG mailing list:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Daniel Buchner and I have been working on a new DID method called DID
>> DHT. Yes, I know what you’re thinking…another DID method, really? But we
>> believe it’s worth it for a truly decentralized and (relatively) simple
>> method which does not rely on a blockchain. We believe this sweet spot can
>> enable true decentralization and broad adoption in the market, as
>> blockchains remain undesirable for many.
>>
>> Here are a few key points:
>>
>>
>>    - Utilizes BitTorrent’s mainline DHT
>>       - Has tens of millions of nodes
>>       - Has been around for 15+ years
>>       - Already widely used by many large companies (e.g. Ubuntu,
>>       Microsoft)
>>    - 1 KB maximum payload size
>>       - Uses a mapping of DID Documents to DNS resource records for
>>       semantics and compression
>>    - Relies on signed mutable records from Mainline DHT (BEP44
>>    <https://www.bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0044.html>)
>>       - No need to trust a server — each record is signed!
>>       - Order enforced by a sequence number.
>>    - Supports any feature of a DID Document
>>       - Except for root key rotation; relies on a stable root key
>>    - Interoperable with existing DID methods such as did:key and did:jwk
>>       - We have spoken with authors of both methods, who are amenable to
>>       support an optional resolution step to the DHT to extend these existing
>>       methods
>>    - We have mechanisms for spam reduction, gateway discovery, and more
>>    features!
>>
>>
>>
>> You can find the latest draft of the specification here:
>> https://did-dht.com/
>>
>> At Block / TBD we’ve already put out a number of open source
>> implementations in Go, Kotlin, and Typescript. You can find links at our
>> repository here <https://github.com/TBD54566975/did-dht-method>.
>> Additionally we’re hosting a free-to-use gateway server which is intended
>> for *testing purposes only: *https://diddht.tbddev.org/swagger/index.html.
>> We will be continuing development of our open source gateway and plan to
>> contribute a driver for the universal resolver.
>>
>> Concretely we are looking for feedback and other parties interested in
>> testing the method out. We have high hopes that should DIDs be on a path to
>> resolution in browsers, DHT could be a strong candidate.
>>
>> Looking forward to your feedback,
>>
>>
>>
>> Gabe Cohen
>>
>> Lead Platform Engineer, Verifiable Credentials
>>
>> gabe@tbd.email <gcohen@tbd.email>
>>
>> TBD <http://tbd.website/> | LinkedIn <https://linkedin.com/in/cohengabe>
>> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/decentralgabe>
>>
>>
>>