- From: Benjamin Goering <bengoering@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 17:20:27 -0800
- To: Kim Hamilton <kimdhamilton@gmail.com>
- Cc: Daniel Buchner <dbuchner@tbd.email>, Gabe Cohen <gabe@tbd.email>, Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com>, W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAGYs8_-AMsMfGw6bDRzMeCnm9GW7zf32CdrnV4a4DcQfT4q-CA@mail.gmail.com>
> I see the spec mentions Ipns but there’s no section on rotation. Perhaps that was the intent? I have worked with and talked to some of the did:ipid authors over the last 18months, but was never involved at the time, and the project <https://github.com/ipfs-shipyard/js-did-ipid> is in the https://ipfs-shipyard.org/, so I don't have the answer to this unfortunately. johnnycrunch told me earlier this year he still thinks it's a good idea and is willing to work with others on it, but I also hear that Decentral Gabe's conversation did not go anywhere, though that doesn't quite mean that other folks wouldn't get somewhere under different constraints. I think the zcap/object-capability model might be helpful for things like authorizing rotations. It would be nice if `ipns:` got the ability to use that. https://github.com/web3-storage/ucanto-name-system On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 5:10 PM Kim Hamilton <kimdhamilton@gmail.com> wrote: > I see the spec mentions Ipns but there’s no section on rotation. Perhaps > that was the intent? > In earlier days, when we were all putting DIDs on blockchains (or on > Facebook) this method was an appealing alternative. > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 4:43 PM Benjamin Goering <bengoering@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > 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 considering helping with this and started to, but decided not to after >> it seemed like ipid could not be used and the goal was to make a new did >> method (at the time, referred to as `did:x`) >> https://twitter.com/csuwildcat/status/1633825603949416448 >> >> On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 2:26 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> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> -- >> Benjamin Goering, Software Producer >> bengo.is >> @bengo <https://twitter.com/bengo> - github.com/gobengo - >> linkedin.com/in/benjamingoering >> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/benjamingoering> >> > -- Benjamin Goering, Software Producer bengo.is @bengo <https://twitter.com/bengo> - github.com/gobengo - linkedin.com/in/benjamingoering <https://www.linkedin.com/in/benjamingoering>
Received on Tuesday, 12 December 2023 01:20:46 UTC