Re: Ipid rotation (was Re: Introducing the DID DHT Method)

Pull requests for the IPID DID method are welcome and encouraged.

https://github.com/did-ipid/ipid-method-spec/pulls


Best,

Jonny



> On Dec 11, 2023, at 7:22 PM, Benjamin Goering <bengoering@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Also just want to add that https://did-dht.com/ does indeed look great and I'm really happy to see the launch. I was also pleasantly surprised to attend the sesh with daniel and gabe at IIW a couple months ago and ask some more specific questions and I think I gave some pointers. On the whole I think it's a really good idea to have a did method for bt mainline to tysm to the whole team involved.
> 
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 5:20 PM Benjamin Goering <bengoering@gmail.com <mailto:bengoering@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> > 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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:gcohen@tbd.email>
>>>>>>> TBD <http://tbd.website/> | LinkedIn <https://linkedin.com/in/cohengabe> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/decentralgabe>
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Benjamin Goering, Software Producer
>>>> bengo.is <http://bengo.is/>
>>>> @bengo <https://twitter.com/bengo> - github.com/gobengo <https://github.com/gobengo> - linkedin.com/in/benjamingoering <https://www.linkedin.com/in/benjamingoering>
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Benjamin Goering, Software Producer
>> bengo.is <http://bengo.is/>
>> @bengo <https://twitter.com/bengo> - github.com/gobengo <https://github.com/gobengo> - linkedin.com/in/benjamingoering <https://www.linkedin.com/in/benjamingoering>
> 
> 
> --
> Benjamin Goering, Software Producer
> bengo.is <http://bengo.is/>
> @bengo <https://twitter.com/bengo> - github.com/gobengo <https://github.com/gobengo> - linkedin.com/in/benjamingoering <https://www.linkedin.com/in/benjamingoering>