Improve spec language around identity keys, resolution, gateways, and TLD #135
Conversation
decentralgabe
requested review from
csuwildcat,
frankhinek and
mistermoe
as code owners
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #135 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 73.26% 73.26%
=======================================
Files 17 17
Lines 1343 1343
=======================================
Hits 984 984
Misses 266 266
Partials 93 93 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
spec/spec.md
Outdated
| relay or a [[ref:Gateway]]. | ||
|
|
||
| 2. Decode the resulting [[ref:BEP44]] response's `v` value using [[ref:bencode]]. | ||
|
|
||
| 3. Reverse the DNS [property mapping](#property-mapping) process and re-construct a conformant [[ref:DID Document]]. | ||
|
|
||
| a. Expand all identifiers to their fully-qualified form (e.g. `did:dht:uodqi99wuzxsz6yx445zxkp8ddwj9q54ocbcg8yifsqru45x63kj#0` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@frankhinek addressing #130 here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
when this calls out "all identifiers", just so I understand, isn't only the Identity Key represented as "#0" or "0"? also this refers to verification methods, right? are there other parts of the did doc that could be represented as #xxx?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I mean to say a DID Doc should always use fully qualified identifiers, regardless of the verification method id
it is confusing to handle #0 or #key-1 as opposed to did:dht:example#0 or did:dht:example#key-1
makes it tougher for implementations to handle some cases with fragments and others without
spec/spec.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| [[def:Identity Key]] | ||
| ~ An [[ref:Ed25519]] public key encoded with [[ref:z-base-32]] used to uniquely identify a `did:dht` document. | ||
| ~ An [Identity Key](#identity-key) is a [[ref:Ed25519]] public key encoded required to authenticate all records in |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this reads weird. is a [[ref:Ed25519]] public key encoded required specifically. are you missing with [[ref:z-base-32]]`?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes good call out - thanks!
| | _s1._did. | TXT | 7200 | id=dwn;t=DecentralizedWebNode;se=https://dwn.tbddev.org/dwn5 | | ||
| | Name | Type | TTL | Rdata | | ||
| | ------------ | ---- | ------ | ------------------------------------------------------------ | | ||
| | _did.`<ID>`. | TXT | 7200 | v=0;vm=k0,k1,k2;auth=k0;asm=k1;inv=k2;del=k2;srv=s0,s1,s2 | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yess. I was confused by this initially. seems obvious in hindsight, but it's good to have it be explicit
| Entries to the [[ref:DHT]] require a signed record. As such, the keypair used for the [[ref:Pkarr]] | ||
| identifier is also used to sign the [[ref:DHT]] record. This keypair ****MUST**** always be present in a `did:dht` document | ||
| and is referred to as the [[ref:Identity Key]]. | ||
| Entries to the [[ref:DHT]] require a signed record as per [[ref:BEP44]]. As such, the keypair used for the [[ref:Pkarr]] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
really good to see this called out
spec/spec.md
Outdated
| relay or a [[ref:Gateway]]. | ||
|
|
||
| 2. Decode the resulting [[ref:BEP44]] response's `v` value using [[ref:bencode]]. | ||
|
|
||
| 3. Reverse the DNS [property mapping](#property-mapping) process and re-construct a conformant [[ref:DID Document]]. | ||
|
|
||
| a. Expand all identifiers to their fully-qualified form (e.g. `did:dht:uodqi99wuzxsz6yx445zxkp8ddwj9q54ocbcg8yifsqru45x63kj#0` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
when this calls out "all identifiers", just so I understand, isn't only the Identity Key represented as "#0" or "0"? also this refers to verification methods, right? are there other parts of the did doc that could be represented as #xxx?
A number of clarifying adjustments.
Also fix #130