- From: Jori Lehtinen <lehtinenjori03@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2026 13:10:40 +0200
- To: Amir Hameed <amsaalegal@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web)" <mwherman@parallelspace.net>, Daniel Hardman <daniel.hardman@gmail.com>, W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAA6zkAtgSaiVc+3Q42Pjw1ZFxYGPg-KFksydTGHdXVtbE4_X9w@mail.gmail.com>
So two endpoints? One that translates email to did, and another one that translates did to email? And the value proposition is what? Takes email message and transforms it to a DIDComm message and delivers it to some kind of DIDComm inbox and the other way around allows to respond with a DIDComm message turned in to email and gets translated and delivered to an email inbox. So if another party wants decentralized and private messaging they can have that with a person that doesn't want to migrate or doesn't care or something like this? ke 28.1.2026 klo 12.10 Amir Hameed (amsaalegal@gmail.com) kirjoitti: > Hi Michael > > Thank you for engaging, I don’t have single full architecture diagram but > I just draw one for you and I am attaching it here , I believe it will give > you an idea of how bidirectional runtime mapping happens between two > different identifiers, Have a look then we can dive deep into what goes > under the hood, there are two mappings happening inside runtime, one is > header mapping and another is message format mapping. > > On Wed, 28 Jan 2026 at 3:26 PM, Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) < > mwherman@parallelspace.net> wrote: > >> >> 1. RE: a bidirectional DID ↔ Email bridge acting as a universal >> message router >> >> >> >> This is confusing because “DID” (an identifier) and “Email” (an email >> message/system/protocol) are “not of the same type”. >> >> >> >> For example: DID and Email Address are of the same type (both character >> string identifiers). >> >> >> >> 2. RE: translates email messages into DID-native formats >> >> >> >> What is a “DID-native (email message) format”? …an example? >> >> >> >> Michael Herman >> >> Chief Digital Architect >> >> Web 7.0 Foundation / TDW™ >> >> >> >> *From:* Amir Hameed <amsaalegal@gmail.com> >> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 27, 2026 1:05 PM >> *To:* Daniel Hardman <daniel.hardman@gmail.com> >> *Cc:* Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net>; >> W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org> >> *Subject:* Re: [Email-to-DID Bridge] Exploring a practical migration >> path for email infrastructure >> >> >> >> Hi Michael >> >> The core idea of this bridge is to be fully protocol-agnostic. While >> DIDComm is currently the strongest candidate for DID-native messaging, the >> design is not limited to it—we have already tested WebSockets and >> HTTP-based delivery methods as well. >> >> The real problem we are addressing is that today there are two types of >> users: those who prefer communicating via DIDs, and those for whom >> traditional email is perfectly sufficient. In real-world scenarios such as >> customer support or enterprise communication, both groups must be able to >> coexist and communicate seamlessly. >> >> This becomes a classic translation problem, similar to human languages. >> If one person speaks Hindi and another speaks English, communication is >> only possible through a translator. In the same way, the DID world and the >> email world require a neutral translation layer. >> >> That is what this system provides: a bidirectional DID ↔ Email bridge >> acting as a universal message router. It maps email addresses to DIDs and >> translates email messages into DID-native formats (and vice versa) at >> runtime. >> >> Rather than being just a mailbox, it functions as a universal message >> box, capable of handling both email and DID messages simultaneously. Users >> remain free to choose how they communicate, while the bridge ensures >> interoperability underneath. >> >> The goal is to enable gradual adoption of decentralized identity without >> breaking compatibility with the existing, widely-used email ecosystem, >> while keeping the system open-source and extensible for future protocols. >> >> Regards >> >> Amir Hameed Mir >> >> Sirraya Labs >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 27 Jan 2026 at 5:55 PM, Daniel Hardman <daniel.hardman@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> email + DIDComm work: >> https://github.com/decentralized-identity/didcomm-messaging/blob/main/extensions/email_transport/main.md >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 4:57 PM Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) < >> mwherman@parallelspace.net> wrote: >> >> Amir, once you’ve mapped an SMTP email address to a DID, which protocol >> are you using to complete the email message delivery? …for example, is it >> DIDComm? >> >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> Michael Herman >> >> Chief Digital Architect >> >> Web 7.0™ / TDW™ >> >> >> >> *From:* Amir Hameed <amsaalegal@gmail.com> >> *Sent:* Sunday, January 25, 2026 12:51 PM >> *To:* W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org> >> *Subject:* [Email-to-DID Bridge] Exploring a practical migration path >> for email infrastructure >> >> >> >> Hello CCG community, >> >> I'm writing from Sirraya Labs to share an early-stage but >> production-tested approach we've been developing: an *Email–DID Router* that >> bridges traditional email infrastructure with decentralized identity >> (DID/VC) systems. We're keen to gather feedback, explore alignment with >> related W3C work, and understand whether this direction resonates with the >> community’s broader interoperability goals. >> What we’re exploring >> >> The system operates as an enterprise-grade gateway that: >> >> - Maps traditional email addresses (e.g., executive@company.com) to >> DIDs (e.g., did:example:alice123) >> - Transforms SMTP-based emails into verifiable, identity-aware >> messages >> - Routes messages using confidence-based logic, security screening, >> and configurable policies >> - Runs with full auditability and measurable performance (tested in >> live environments) >> >> Here’s a snapshot from a recent run: >> >> text >> >> [2026-01-25T11:31:28Z INFO email_did_gateway] Processing incoming email from chairman@board-of-directors.com to executive@company.com >> >> [2026-01-25T11:31:28Z INFO email_did_gateway] Successfully processed email into DID message: 71259949-4f38-46a1-8c74-c86540ba5917 >> >> [2026-01-25T11:31:28Z INFO email_did_router] Processed executive email - Confidence: 0.78, Method: RuleBased >> >> Why this matters for DID/VC adoption >> >> Email remains the dominant channel for business, institutional, and >> personal communication. Rather than proposing a disruptive replacement, >> we’re focused on *building incremental, opt-in bridges* that allow: >> >> 1. Gradual migration of trust from SMTP+PKI to DID/VC models >> 2. Immediate value through better routing, security screening, and >> audit capabilities >> 3. Preservation of existing infrastructure and investment while >> enabling verifiable communication >> >> We see potential alignment with several W3C efforts—DID Comm, VC-API, >> identity hubs, and trust spanning protocols—and are keen to explore how >> this work might complement ongoing standardization. >> Questions for the community >> >> Before we formalize or release anything publicly, we’d value your >> perspectives on: >> >> - *Use cases* we may have overlooked (enterprise, government, >> healthcare, education, etc.) >> - *Privacy and compliance considerations* (GDPR, residency, >> retention, consent) >> - *Mapping lifecycle* (persistence, revocation, recovery, expiration) >> - *Confidence and trust models* suitable for email→DID routing >> - *Potential alignment* with existing or emerging W3C specifications >> >> We’re particularly interested in whether this kind of bridge could help >> accelerate real-world adoption of DID/VC systems in environments where >> email remains non-negotiable. >> >> We’re at the stage of gauging interest and refining the approach based on >> community feedback. If this resonates, we’d be happy to: >> >> - Share more detailed design notes >> - Discuss integration with related CCG work items >> - Potentially present in a future CCG call >> - Explore collaboration with groups working on interoperability, >> trust layers, or migration pathways >> >> Our goal is to help build *responsible, incremental bridges*—not to >> replace email or DIDs, but to enable them to coexist and evolve together. >> >> We look forward to your thoughts, critiques, and suggestions. >> >> Best regards, >> Amir Hameed >> Sirraya Labs >> >>
Attachments
- image/jpeg attachment: IMG_5909.jpeg
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2026 11:11:02 UTC