feat: did:peer #120

andorsk · 2022-06-30T04:13:04Z

This is an implementation of https://identity.foundation/peer-did-method-spec/ related to

Implemented:

limited implementation of method 0 and method 2 or did:peer

Also included:

DID and Resolver interfaces
Some shared stuff was refactored such as general key encoding/ errors
Update to the service struct and added some additional support to the DIDDocuments.

There's more to do here, but I will leave that for another PR unless it is necessary to add it to this one. Anything unimplemented I have returning an "unimplemented" error.

andorsk · 2022-06-30T04:34:03Z

Things aren't nearly done here yet, but a couple key things I've realized in this process that I wanted to share:

I've added in an DID interface. I'm pretty sure we'll need this, but I need to align this with the DID specifications on DIF.
Errors should be standardized. Probably in the "errors" file of the "utils", which is where I put things.

I'll update this when I've made more progress.

decentralgabe · 2022-06-30T20:01:20Z

did/interface.go

+// Define the interface more clearly
+type DID interface {
+	IsValid() bool
+	Resolve() (*DIDDocument, error)


hmm, not sure about this one.
some DIDs (like ION, and others) require network resolvers, which require hosted software. I'd like to avoid making recommendations of which resolvers to use here.

some DIDs (like peer, web, key) can be resolved more simply.

Sure. I'm not sure about this one either. I do think we need a DID interface though! I'm just not sure exactly what goes into it. IsValid() seems reasonable. What else is required in a DID?

hmm...maybe some common methods to get keys? like getAuthenticationMethods, getVerificationMethods and so on?

would validation just be static, or should we eventually expand to determining whether the keys in the doc are themselves valid?

there also needs to be a more flexible way to determine validity across DID methods, as they each have a set of properties/processes that uniquely apply to each method

I think that's why each DID needs to implement an IsValid method no? That method would determine if the DID is valid or not.

It seems like that the biggest issue here is the network resolvers?

For resolution, here's what I ended up doing which works:

type Resolver interface { Resolve(d DID) (*DIDDocument, error) }

Some did's will have resolvers built in, and so will not. So network based resolvers we can ignore fine, it just won't be implementing the Resolver interface

did/peer.go

decentralgabe · 2022-06-30T20:04:49Z

looks great so far. I like where your head is at for (1)..left a comment
(2)- agreed

andorsk · 2022-07-01T08:35:19Z

thanks @decentralgabe ! yep. Got them. Thanks!

andorsk · 2022-07-04T13:51:31Z

Right now there is simple encoding/decoding of method0 and method2 of did:peer. I'd prefer to get this into main, and then submit subsequent PR's with additional support. Lmk if that works, otherwise i'll put this back into draft.

The scope of this already went a little out what it was supposed, with the introduction of some general utility stuff (such as errors and the util.go) and introducing some interfaces to the repo.

decentralgabe

small ones, should be good to go after this

did/model.go

decentralgabe · 2022-07-05T21:42:48Z

did/model.go

@@ -67,4 +73,15 @@ func (d *DIDDocument) IsValid() error {
 	return util.NewValidator().Struct(d)
 }

+func NewDIDDocument() *DIDDocument {
+	return &DIDDocument{
+		Authentication:       make([]VerificationMethodSet, 0),


would new() work? may be easier to read

did/peer_test.go

util/errors.go

Co-authored-by: Gabe <gabe.l.cohen@gmail.com>

andorsk · 2022-07-06T17:23:18Z

@decentralgabe updates made. One question for you and then maybe we are good to go?

decentralgabe · 2022-07-06T17:57:04Z

did/peer.go

+// offloading pairwise and n-wise relationships to peer DIDs.
+//
+// Currently only methods 0 and 2 are supported.
+// Method 1 will be supported in a future date


created #137

decentralgabe · 2022-07-06T17:57:22Z

did/peer.go

+
+var availablePeerMethods = map[string]Resolver{
+	"0": PeerMethod0{},
+	"1": PeerMethod1{},


should 1 be removed since it's not yet supported?

decentralgabe · 2022-07-06T17:57:42Z

did/peer.go

+type DIDPeer string
+type PurposeType string


Suggested change

type DIDPeer string

type PurposeType string

type (

DIDPeer string

PurposeType string

)

decentralgabe

gave you a more thorough review this time. really close 😄

did/peer.go

andorsk · 2022-07-06T18:24:20Z

@decentralgabe thanks a ton for going through the PR again. Super appreciate the second pair of eyes. Definitely missed a few things which you caught. Any other issues lmk.

Again, thanks a ton for the review!

andorsk · 2022-07-06T18:27:03Z

One thing I'll implement in a future PR: We should make a future issue where Resolver is actually re-specified to DIDResolver. There's a chance we have non DIDResolvers down the road and we'd want to not run into confusion/conflict here.

decentralgabe · 2022-07-06T18:30:55Z

One thing I'll implement in a future PR: We should make a future issue where Resolver is actually re-specified to DIDResolver. There's a chance we have non DIDResolvers down the road and we'd want to not run into confusion/conflict here.

agreed

andorsk · 2022-07-06T19:10:26Z

Think we are good, as I've addressed all the comments, but feel free to bring up more critiques. Comments are welcome 👍

* origin/main: feat: did:peer (#120) # Conflicts: # did/key.go # did/model.go

andorsk requested a review from decentralgabe as a code owner June 30, 2022 04:13

andorsk marked this pull request as draft June 30, 2022 04:13

andorsk changed the title ~~Peer DID~~ feat: Peer DID Jun 30, 2022

andorsk changed the title ~~feat: Peer DID~~ feat: did:peer Jun 30, 2022

andorsk force-pushed the feat-did-peer branch 2 times, most recently from bf8d4d9 to d5b529f Compare June 30, 2022 12:13

decentralgabe reviewed Jun 30, 2022

View reviewed changes

did/peer.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

decentralgabe reviewed Jun 30, 2022

View reviewed changes

did/peer.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

andorsk force-pushed the feat-did-peer branch 4 times, most recently from 6def758 to 6736f90 Compare July 4, 2022 12:45

andorsk added 2 commits July 4, 2022 18:24

adding did:peer

ecb8658

added Ed25519VerificationKey2020

7bb15e7

andorsk force-pushed the feat-did-peer branch from 6736f90 to 7bb15e7 Compare July 4, 2022 12:54

andorsk added 5 commits July 4, 2022 18:36

improvements to the method0 test

dda13b0

adding did:peer

2cad139

added Ed25519VerificationKey2020

28b219a

improvements to the method0 test

69a0c71

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/feat-did-peer' into feat-did-peer

5222f4e

andorsk marked this pull request as ready for review July 4, 2022 13:51

Merge branch 'main' into feat-did-peer

2ac7c2a

decentralgabe requested changes Jul 5, 2022

View reviewed changes

andorsk and others added 2 commits July 6, 2022 10:02

Update did/model.go

0a5c72b

Co-authored-by: Gabe <gabe.l.cohen@gmail.com>

Merge branch 'main' into feat-did-peer

2b5dbc4

andorsk added 2 commits July 6, 2022 22:52

fixes to PR based upon comments

90b0658

updated error format

2257c99

decentralgabe reviewed Jul 6, 2022

View reviewed changes

decentralgabe requested changes Jul 6, 2022

View reviewed changes

decentralgabe and others added 2 commits July 6, 2022 11:08

Merge branch 'main' into feat-did-peer

bae0e9b

resolved comments

cdfb9b3

andorsk and others added 2 commits July 7, 2022 00:01

added notes

29356f5

Merge branch 'main' into feat-did-peer

93bc2c2

decentralgabe approved these changes Jul 6, 2022

View reviewed changes

decentralgabe merged commit d5273d2 into TBD54566975:main Jul 6, 2022

This was referenced Jul 6, 2022

Support did:peer #114

Closed

did:peer: CRDT Implementation #138

Open

decentralgabe added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 6, 2022

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into pe-builders

e6f596a

* origin/main: feat: did:peer (#120) # Conflicts: # did/key.go # did/model.go

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat: did:peer #120

feat: did:peer #120

andorsk commented Jun 30, 2022 •

edited

Loading

andorsk commented Jun 30, 2022

decentralgabe Jun 30, 2022

andorsk Jul 1, 2022

decentralgabe Jul 1, 2022

andorsk Jul 4, 2022

andorsk Jul 4, 2022

decentralgabe commented Jun 30, 2022

andorsk commented Jul 1, 2022

andorsk commented Jul 4, 2022 •

edited

Loading

decentralgabe left a comment

decentralgabe Jul 5, 2022

andorsk commented Jul 6, 2022

decentralgabe Jul 6, 2022

decentralgabe Jul 6, 2022

decentralgabe Jul 6, 2022

decentralgabe left a comment

andorsk commented Jul 6, 2022

andorsk commented Jul 6, 2022 •

edited

Loading

decentralgabe commented Jul 6, 2022

andorsk commented Jul 6, 2022

feat: did:peer #120

feat: did:peer #120

Conversation

andorsk commented Jun 30, 2022 • edited Loading

andorsk commented Jun 30, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

decentralgabe commented Jun 30, 2022

andorsk commented Jul 1, 2022

andorsk commented Jul 4, 2022 • edited Loading

decentralgabe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

andorsk commented Jul 6, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

decentralgabe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

andorsk commented Jul 6, 2022

andorsk commented Jul 6, 2022 • edited Loading

decentralgabe commented Jul 6, 2022

andorsk commented Jul 6, 2022

andorsk commented Jun 30, 2022 •

edited

Loading

andorsk commented Jul 4, 2022 •

edited

Loading

andorsk commented Jul 6, 2022 •

edited

Loading