- From: Amir Hameed <amsaalegal@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2025 07:27:07 -0700
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Cc: public-credentials@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CANGYBsyu8f70Tkp=HCvQaNxx_=LdFSajgVMgwD0feWEY8dyTyA@mail.gmail.com>
Kindly find attached is another screenshot of how UDNA header works. On Sat, 20 Sept 2025 at 07:18, Amir Hameed <amsaalegal@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks again for the references—they’re really helpful. I wanted to > clarify how *UDNA* relates to *did:nostr*, since they actually operate at > different layers. > > At a high level: > > - > > *did:nostr* is a DID Method. It defines how a DID is created, > resolved, and managed on the Nostr network. It’s all about identity—proving > who you are and which keys belong to you—not about routing data. > - > > *UDNA* is a networking framework. It treats DIDs as first-class > primitives for *addressing and routing*, effectively replacing IPs. It > doesn’t care how the DID is created—you could use did:nostr or any other > DID—but focuses on how to send messages to that DID across the network. > > You can think of it like this: a did:nostr is a “phone number” you > control, and UDNA is the “phone network” that actually routes the calls. > > A UDNA packet uses DIDs in its header and can include fields like > RouteHint, KeyHint, Nonce, and Signature. Routing and discovery are handled > dynamically via a *DHT overlay*, so the underlying IPs can change without > affecting reachability. > > UDNA and did:nostr aren’t competing—they’re complementary. UDNA could even > use did:nostr as its identity layer while providing a *secure, > transport-agnostic, identity-native network layer*. > > Best, > Amir Hameed > > On Sat, 20 Sept 2025 at 07:04, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> > wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 20, 2025 at 9:41 AM Amir Hameed <amsaalegal@gmail.com> wrote: >> > At a high level, the minimal viable implementation of UDNA would focus >> on addressing and routing based on cryptographic identities (DIDs) rather >> than network locations. This doesn’t require building a full alternative to >> TCP/IP or UDP, but rather an overlay layer on top of existing transport >> protocols in a transport-agnostic way. >> >> Got it, the screen shots helped. That makes sense. >> >> The work you're doing reminds me a lot of Telehash, which we built the >> first DID implementation on top of many years ago: >> >> >> https://github.com/telehash/telehash.github.io/blob/master/v3/spec/v3.0.0-stable.pdf >> >> It also reminds me of what the did:nostr folks are trying to do, some >> of whom are on this mailing list. How would you characterize what you >> are working as it relates to nostr? >> >> -- manu >> >> -- >> Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/ >> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. >> https://www.digitalbazaar.com/ >> >
Attachments
- image/png attachment: Screenshot__243_.png
Received on Saturday, 20 September 2025 14:27:27 UTC