Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 7 Next »

Meeting Schedule

  • Bi-Weekly at 8:00-9:00 am PDT / 11:00-12:00 am EDT / 15:00 – 16:00 UTC / 17:00 - 16:00 CEST

Attendees


Main Goal of this Meeting

We're using this week's EFWG meeting to give the floor to anyone who'd like to give an update on IIW. 

Agenda Items and Notes (including all relevant links)

TimeAgenda ItemLeadNotes
5 min
  • Start recording
  • Welcome & antitrust notice
  • Introduction of new members
  • Agenda review
Chairs
  • Antitrust Policy Notice: Attendees are reminded to adhere to the meeting agenda and not participate in activities prohibited under antitrust and competition laws. Only members of ToIP who have signed the necessary agreements are permitted to participate in this activity beyond an observer role.
  • New Member Introductions:
1 min

Announcements

TF Leads

News or events of interest to EFWG members:

5 minReview of action items from the previous meetingChairs
Bhutan NDI Case Study update
40 min

IIW Recap

All

Sessions or content that we'd be interested in hearing about:

  • Trust Registry Face-Off
  • Apple / Google POC
  • DID:webs
  • DID:tdw
  • Connecting X.509 and DIDs and VIDs
  • Personal Data Stores
  • or anything else you found interesting or insightful
  • ...
5 min
  • Review decisions/action items
  • Planning for the next meeting 
Chairs

Recording

Notes

AI notes - coming


TDW - Trust DID Web is a new DID method but doesn't get DID doc from HTTP location but instead you get a log of all the entries of the changes of the DID doc. Every line is tied to the previous via a hash of the entry. The controller determined according to DID spec who much sign every transition. Very similar to DID: webs, but the difference is the transition state is the DID doc. Can you pre-rotation of keys. Next step, take the spec to a task force to evolve the specification. This DID has portability that lets you move the location of the DID, this changes the DID but the SCID (self certifying identifier) plus the history stays the same. Combine with high assurance DNS as with DID:webs will work the same. Long term storage - 30yr+, what kind of archival storage for this information?

DID:web is becoming well used but it really lasts history verifiability and this specification (TDW) adds ledger based features without a ledger but still fits very well with DID:web.

Comparison to DID:webs - DID:webs is KERI focused with a side of DID. But DID:tdw is DID focused and has less complexity compared to KERI and DID:webs.

DID:webs - uses KERI to take you state to state (using KERI and then producing a DID document out of that), you have to go further to generate a DID doc, requires more complexity to fit within the DID standard specification. The implication is that DID:tdw is easier from an adoption standpoint. 

did:tdw Specification (rendered): https://bcgov.github.io/trustdidweb/
did:tdw Specification (repository): https://github.com/bcgov/trustdidweb
Presentation at IIW -- the details start at slide 11: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PHo16asyceRiNKN7UkV8BSmtWtN6Wp3A6_9MV0IQ2jg/edit?usp=sharing
Typescript Implementation: https://github.com/bcgov/trustdidweb-ts
Python Implementation: https://github.com/bcgov/trustdidweb-py

Compared to DID:webs there are some risks compared to KERI but it is more secure than DID:web.

Is there a migration path from DID:tdw to DID:webs - they are totally different and it would have challenges.

Witness, watcher features of KERI could be added to DID:tdw but it doesn't belong in the specification but may appear in the implementation guide.


Decisions


Action Items


Coming up

  • No labels