Hakan: Hello!
Rodolfo Miranda: Hello!
Hakan: How are you doing?
Rodolfo Miranda: Good? Good.
Rodolfo Miranda: Right?
Judith Högerl: Hello! How are you that?
Rodolfo Miranda: Hello! Is it?
Hakan: Do you know if Lens is going to join us today.
Rodolfo Miranda: I'm gonna thank him. You should.
Rodolfo Miranda: So we are Didn't Response.
Hakan: Yeah.
Nice.
Rodolfo Miranda: I lands.
Lance Byrd: hey? Sorry, folks I have a bunch of workers at the house, and well, let's just say nothing's going right with it. And yeah, I I had a meeting, and then I forgot, as they were telling me all my horror stories.
Lance Byrd: All right. It's great to see you. Sorry for the delay. let's see. Are we recording?
Lance Byrd: Hmm. I'll record, I guess. Hey, Judith, already already recording. Okay? Oh, that's right.
Lance Byrd: Okay. So let's see. well, 2 things that I just added to the spreadsheet or just the Pr's from the 2 different projects. so
Lance Byrd: there's the big one for Afgh. let's see here sheets
Lance Byrd: and Aries did come V 2,
Lance Byrd: and I need to share my screen.
Lance Byrd: Not that not that I'm. Showing you anything
Lance Byrd: fantastic here, but it's always good to revisit the
Lance Byrd: spreadsheet.
Lance Byrd: okay. So
Lance Byrd: Yeah, let's see. I had it there. But really I'm changing this interoperability page, it's gonna have to change a a bunch eventually. But under projects I added, these related Pr's. So in hawk on, and Judith they're doing the occupy stuff
Lance Byrd: for issue credential and present proof V 3.
Lance Byrd: And then there's in the ongoing you know, massive integration. one pr for dig company, 2 in a Fj. and then they have a also a. Pr. Related to like the mediator functionality
Lance Byrd: in a. So I added those to the spreadsheet. I guess i'll just post the link to this again, just in case
Lance Byrd: or posterity.
Oh.
Hakan: yeah, Can Can you share this spreadsheets with
Hakan: us as well? I'm not sure if I was in the list.
Lance Byrd: Yeah, sure. Let me. Yes.
Lance Byrd: Oh, yeah, I could put you. I could put you in the share, and then also post the link. Let's see. Do I have you.
Lance Byrd: I might not have your email. Let me post the link. Anyone with the link can can view it. Alright, and comment. And if you, if you end up wanting to be an editor, I can you, if you just send me your of course email I'll
Lance Byrd: I sorry I just have to figure out how there we go. My chat always disappears as soon as I become the
Lance Byrd: the host here, or go full screen. Okay. Yep. So there's the there's the sheets. again. The idea just real quick is that we want to essentially document projects within Aries that have ongoing didcom stuff.
Lance Byrd: We want to track the implementations that are out there that could be related or could be used so like we've even added Barama, which nobody's using in Aries that I know of, but right it could be something interesting and useful, and certainly we would want to eventually know kind of interoperability with those, so that this page, the interoperability page, should.
Lance Byrd: hopefully, you know, be refactored and kind of take into account the projects the implementations. I added, did methods just because without the corresponding did methods. we can't do
Lance Byrd: like did peer together, and things like that. this is the Aries agent test harness tests that are somewhat related. I'm still going through that stuff, although I've had to pause on it recently. and then obviously protocols that that that could be supported.
Lance Byrd: Crypto issues references. Has the Jf. Stuff in it right now. Any other links that we want to add that that might give us some good information. and then
Lance Byrd: i'd forgotten about this questions. One interrupt profiles. Do we need a lightweight alternative to we? He did come. that was something that
Lance Byrd: that we had wanted to consider. So anyways, yeah, we feel free. We can add more sheets or whatever, and then eventually come up with a nice interoperability.
Lance Byrd: Tab.
Hakan: Yeah.
Hakan: that sounds very good. So I think, during our last call I also mentioned we would so come up with a
Hakan: Yeah, a a draft of any kind of an interoperability profile. The things that we will need to
Hakan: either include from the previous areas in top profiles or
Hakan: yeah, upgrade updates from them. Basically.
Hakan: So yeah, I I did that. I didn't know. I I mean, I knew that there was a spreadsheet, but I didn't know that we wanted to put the profile here as well. So I put it on a different sheet. If you guys want to review it, or like Have a conversation about it.
Hakan: yeah, we can do so.
Lance Byrd: And I'm: I'm: 100% open to we could do it as a spreadsheet. We could do it as this documents I'm flexible. If if people have preferences of how best to track this. I think it is pretty good, so far, so I I guess we can put them in in the spreadsheet.
Lance Byrd: Okay? And then yeah, let's go through this together. You can kind of guide us through it. And so if you can go to the very bottom of the
Hakan: yeah. So this is where it starts. Basically. Can you scroll up a bit further.
Hakan: a bit more.
Hakan: a little bit more, and that's a bit more
Hakan: yeah perfect. So this is where it starts. So basically I'm: i'm pretty sure you also came up with the areas into a profile page on. I think it's one of the features
Hakan: I I I left the link there. Yeah, it's a concept. So 3 o 2 areas into a profile. So
Hakan: well, I I didn't put
Hakan: a lot of new things I just put took the one that we had from the areas in top of the profile 2
Hakan: and started commenting on them, and like saying like, are there going to be any necessities to
Hakan: change anything that are existing?
Hakan: Or are we going to need new protocols? Because this is exactly what happened with the upgrade from Mary's intel profile. 1 point oh, to 2 point. Oh, so they basically took the list from 1 point. Oh, extended with the 2 point all stuff, and took a look if they needed to change something if they wanted to drop it if they wanted to.
Hakan: yeah up to upgrade it. Basically
Hakan: and yeah. So if you go down a bit lower, you will see the same
Hakan: structure. Basically. So tutorials of targets.
Hakan: Yeah. So this is where it stuff. So basically we have the Aip V one and those for the set of Rfcs
Hakan: that for meant to be a part of it.
Hakan: So this this made the interpreter for one.
Hakan: Okay? And then what happened is basically they made an upgrade to it. So they said, okay, these were the ones coming from a a IP to 1.0
Hakan: and
Hakan: basically the same features have been taken and taken into consideration. How to
Hakan: What is it going to be discontinued, upgraded or used, as it were, before, basically.
Hakan: and that comes a bit a lower.
Hakan: that list.
Hakan: So so this is this: is exactly it. So
Hakan: Yeah, there are some notes with basically reformatted minimal updates. It's updated, etc. So taking basically things that for a part of a IP, one
Hakan: came with a couple of upgrades, basically and then edit new stuff like see? For example, goal codes is new. did exchanges new did compile and mime types are new.
Hakan: etc. So I think it's yeah, more or less
Hakan: a visible step from what was IP. A. IP. One? What is a IP 2 point. Oh, then there are some other things like with the mediators, and like encryption envelopes that have been added as well.
Hakan: So
Hakan: I just took basically this list
Hakan: and starts it to go through it one by one, to see whether we're going to
Hakan: use them.
Hakan: Update them, or just drop them
Hakan: for a. I. P. 3,
Hakan: and that is the one that is visible in that word to you. yeah, Google sheets basically.
Hakan: Yeah. So
Hakan: the question is whether it's going to call it aip 3 point or not. But this is, I think, something that
Hakan: going to. Yeah, we can think about it.
Lance Byrd: It seems to have strong support from Steven and Sam. So the currents that are unrelated. But
Lance Byrd: yeah, I mean I, You know this is one of those things like. At what point do we just say, Yes, we're doing aip 3.0. I I would vote that we just go ahead at this point and say, a IP 3 is
Lance Byrd: is happening. I mean that this is fantastic. What you're doing, and then they seem to support that idea. It it seems to be kind of like. Well, what do you want to do? But I think at this point that would be
Lance Byrd: because of the legacy, and and how much people know about it. and you know we've kind of floated the idea past our customers. And I I just think that
Lance Byrd: the community community can really rally around the the concept of an of a new aip that's did come. V. 2 related because anyone who's
Lance Byrd: kind of thought like oh, aip 2, you know. Does that include? Did come, and they start digging, or did come v 2, and they they start digging into it, and then they're like it's not really. And yeah, so I I feel like this would be like some solid ground for the community to just say Yes, that's the point a IP 3 did come V. 2,
Rodolfo Miranda: So my my question is, if we support, for example, we support
Rodolfo Miranda: I. P. 3 a 3.
Rodolfo Miranda: Should we support the children. So if we are in 3,
Rodolfo Miranda: do we need to support it? It can be one
Hakan: that wasn't the case with aip, 2.0 to 1 point. Oh, right if if we see yeah because of the interdependency frameworks such as go, for example, before the in the SDK binding of go.
Hakan: They did not support anything related to India. That's why I don't think it's a necessity to support one. But if there is a need of backwards comfortability. Or if you're just moving on with, for example, a Akapi or
Hakan: framework, javascript, then, yeah, in that case it's just gonna be at addition, and
Hakan: not necessarily.
Rodolfo Miranda: Yeah, that's so in in in that, in that in that leads did it conversion? It's not. It's not there, right? Or it is
Hakan: not in this one. That's why, for example, if you look at to the feature 0, 0, 19 encryption envelope. I just noted that it is not required for a IP 3 point, all because that is the all the encryption envelope use for did come V: One.
Rodolfo Miranda: Okay, got it.
Lance Byrd: and I I I really like that concept. I'm so glad you brought that over to, because
Lance Byrd: that is the problem with legacy right? If you always have to carry all of the legacy, you know, into the new aip.
Lance Byrd: Then I don't think it will ever get done right, because it just becomes such a burden and and people are already complaining that, did come V 2 is.
Lance Byrd: It has quite a wide scope, and it takes a lot in order to implement it. So.
Lance Byrd: yeah, my preference is, and I I Honestly, I I was not familiar with this process. How kind i'm so glad that you kind of listed this out the way that you have it. It's excellent. But yeah, my my inclination is that if we can make a IP 3 as light as possible.
Lance Byrd: and then with people having the option to go support a IP, you know 2. If they want
Lance Byrd: that, that would be a major advantage for us.
Rodolfo Miranda: Yeah, because you you can support any.
Rodolfo Miranda: because I think they accept message. You. You put that the one it'd be 2 to 3.
Alex: I have a quick question, guys. So i'm looking at the different like proposals, and like the different art of season there. And i'm seeing that there are like technical rfcs, as well as like application related. I've c's as well as like
Alex: sub-
Alex: so i'm trying to figure out what's the purpose of like a profile and like in this case, because, like there's like Jason Ld. Support like static Peer did
like
Alex: Presentation Exchange, or like. If you support a specific context like the attachment. So i'm trying to figure out, how can we scope this one
Alex: so
Alex: there, cause I can try to figure out like exactly what are we trying to put in a profile? Does that make sense?
Lance Byrd: yeah, totally.
Hakan: It makes sense. No, no, it's
Hakan: So I I I think you ask a legitimate question, because, the thing is, we have discount. V 2, and discomfort is basically for agents to communicate with each other. There is like an encryption envelope. So in the in the in the most basic we need to be able to do a did exchange. We need to be able to, use the same
Hakan: encryption envelope, or like key exchange with you. Defy Herman use the same yeah message structure. But, for example, things like, for example, the Jason Ld. Attachments, or or Bbs, plus, or or or and on Crest, or whatever so those i'm. I'm. Also like this is something that we will have to talk about as well, because they those are actually like payloads in the did convey to message, and not necessarily related to, did convey
as a as a
Hakan: protocol.
Alex: right? Right? Right? And like you get to exchange that information, and like the presentation exchange like you can see like what what credentials you support, and all that gets done at a different level. Then, like a interrupt profile, I would say, yeah, but this is exactly what we will have to think about, because
like
Hakan: so, this has actually been sold with Bucky right? They they they just like extended it more than to did commute today, they said, okay, we're going to use it as the basic. But then, on top of it.
Hakan: we're going to use bbs plus as a credentials, or it's it's like use. The the presentation Exchange protocol attachment type for present proof, v. 3 that they also specified. So
Hakan: maybe the way forward is to call this savaki profile. It's. It's also possible, like because just having just having the bare minimum is not going to cover, because we will need to find out like whether we support the Jason Ld. Whether we support an on credits in these.
Hakan: Probably
Hakan: not, or it it it's it's really on the air. Basically so this is the part that you'll also come up with as well, I think.
Alex: Got it. Yeah, I guess like something I was curious about like right now we're using. I see that we're using agents only for like issuing credential and like presenting credential. So I was hoping that maybe like would they come? Be 2 protocols? We can have like more application related protocols, like at the same like issue, present proof, credential
Alex: and like, we can have like, yeah, like group chat, or like chat messages and like stuff like that.
Alex: and like interesting, how we can communicate about like exchanging those like protocols as Well, I think it would be something useful to do in the IP 3.
Yeah.
Hakan: that's that's also a legit. So parts
Hakan: we we do have the basic messaging. I see if you scroll down a bit for, but I mean you probably saw it anyway.
Hakan: So we will need to.
Hakan: probably updated according to the
Alex: Yeah. And then, like, I think routing is also almost big. Then they can be, too, as well. So maybe we can get rid of those.
Alex: Oh.
Alex: yeah, yeah, Thank you so much for all the work like I
Hakan: it it. It also needs a lot of discussions like what we want to include, and what we don't want to include. For example, I did realize it. I made a mistake with like, including in the attachments. Because
Hakan: do we really want the in the dependency coming into a I. P 3 point all or not. I don't know we we need to be careful, maybe, about
Hakan: making that statement
Lance Byrd: if we can avoid it. I would love to.
Rodolfo Miranda: Yeah, I mean, Minimal. Yeah, because
Rodolfo Miranda: the way that you can.
Rodolfo Miranda: I think that we used to use the the profile as incremental, like the one IP 2, and
Rodolfo Miranda: the the latest is the best. But I think we can compose like find a minimum.
Rodolfo Miranda: Or did it come? Be 2 like like this, one basic stuff. And then, if you want to support in the other, it can be another profile, right, and you can compose
Rodolfo Miranda: with several.
Rodolfo Miranda: That's just
Hakan: that. That could be a possibility to yeah.
Hakan: So extended.
Rodolfo Miranda: Yeah.
Rodolfo Miranda: this is
Lance Byrd: no. I I was just going to say that this is such an interesting
Lance Byrd: moment. Because, yeah, these aips have been
Lance Byrd: these kind of like, I mean, the goal right is that these agents can just interrupt. But,
Lance Byrd: The variety of ways to interrupt is becoming so great that it's hard to imagine. Yeah, aip 3 right being all encompassing, especially now that the Ares world is untying itself from
Lance Byrd: Indy.
Hakan: Yeah.
Lance Byrd: And yeah, so exactly which Hawkins saying, roto, saying, Alex is is saying like, what is it that composes this thing? Because that's such a hard question to answer. I like what Hawkins saying about maybe calling it aip wacky.
Lance Byrd: But then
Lance Byrd: I I would just love to talk a little bit about that in terms of thoughts of
Lance Byrd: Then what is the aip providing that the kind of wacky specification, isn't providing?
Lance Byrd: And does that kind of give us a hint at our scope
Lance Byrd: thoughts?
Hakan: So
Hakan: my my! To this vaccine is a
Hakan: work that has been done in a collaboration between diff and hyper ledger. and the results was basically vaki. As a specification, however, we need a clear
Hakan: concepts and features
Hakan: that needs to be implemented by the Ares frameworks
Hakan: to be compatible with Baki as a profile.
Hakan: And I think our
Hakan: call in in in here is, if you choose to go back here. I mean, this is also still like an on on the air. But if if you do so, and I I think it looks very similar.
Hakan: but
Hakan: then we have to align with the credential type, which is Bbs, because it's a part of lucky. But if you say yes. Okay, this is the way forward. in that case, I think this working group can be a part of defining the features and concepts Rfc's that are required to fulfill as a spec.
Rodolfo Miranda: So how is it working? Only tied to bbs plus? Or I think it's
Hakan: yeah, all next up it's. It's it's it's a like in vacuum. I'm: i'm going to check this again. But well, that's
Rodolfo Miranda: like in the
Hakan: well you can do India as well. Okay, I thought it was
Hakan: on to the bbs plus. I thought this. This is what they aligned on. When
Alex: I think you can use the different like credential types, like.
Alex: Okay, in that case.
Hakan: Yeah.
Alex: But then again.
Hakan: it's it's very important to the distinction, because, like Indie has one implementation.
Hakan: If you take in the you have to take the libraries that come with it.
Hakan: yeah.
Alex: yeah. I was gonna say that, in my opinion, like the walkie profile like it's an extremely like complex, but like aip. And there's a lot of things to implement at that level
Alex: like like having tried to do that, and having to support all the different like message types, all the different, like context of different credentials.
Alex: It's like a piece of work in and of itself.
Alex: and they like they define like a lot of things on how to exchange credentials like in that specification. So I guess, what i'm trying to figure out like with an aip like. Do we want to have
Alex: similar protocols like that that you can exchange, like other type of information like messages, group messages?
Alex: Or do we just want it to be focused on like credential exchange, and
Alex: like
Alex: everything that's related with all of that?
Alex: Or do we leave that at the Walkie Level?
Because, like.
Alex: yeah, like, I think, like even like it did come interoperability
Alex: with Brian and Dewala and snore like we tried to like.
Alex: even like a subset of all the features that were in there. And just because, like there were so many.
Alex: and
Alex: we weren't like really using walkie like we were using like a
Alex: minimal viable like Walkie, just because, like everything here.
Alex: also cumbersome to implement from scratch.
Okay?
Lance Byrd: And I I tried to bring that point up
Lance Byrd: with Sam.
Lance Byrd: and I don't think I did a good job with it.
Lance Byrd: That is there some kind of simpler form, I mean, I guess that was our question. Our spreadsheet. Is there some simpler form of wacky like
Lance Byrd: I don't I wasn't there when they were defining Wacky, right? So I don't know the discussions that they had in terms of.
Lance Byrd: Okay, we're going to define this back. And yes, it's going to have lots of steps to it and be complicated. But this is kind of this full implementation that covers as much as we can imagine. that is needed.
Lance Byrd: But yeah, is there this shortcut that can be developed? That's more like a you know. You want to get started in this.
Lance Byrd: This did come world, and you want to. You want to patch credentials.
Lance Byrd: You don't need all of of Wacky
Lance Byrd: and
Lance Byrd: yeah, I can't even say what his answer was. you know, I mean, it sounds like
Lance Byrd: Yeah, yeah, I I like, I said. I don't think I asked the question well enough to to get a a straight answer for that.
Lance Byrd: I don't know any yeah thoughts on what Alex is saying in terms of the complexity of Wacky.
Hakan: I I when I say, okay, please go ahead. No. When when when someone say
Rodolfo Miranda: I'm supporting what
Rodolfo Miranda: do you need to support all the spec, or just
Rodolfo Miranda: because if you're supporting, maybe ending why you you should care about the
Rodolfo Miranda: the the bbs plus. It's how you define that in when you say I am supporting work. I I don't know that
Rodolfo Miranda: how it works or should work.
Alex: Yeah, I think Walk you just like specified the messages like within the walking messages like you. They find the credential types
Alex: and everything like within the messages.
Alex: So as long as I can support, like exchanging those messages
Alex: right, you support the what you spec like in my mind. But then, like, do you implement like, do you have like an Ld processor like for for a single credentials like, do you have?
Alex: That's like the back end question, though.
Oh, yeah.
Rodolfo Miranda: okay. But but you support this proposed of a request issue
Rodolfo Miranda: flow. Are Are you okay? Because that that's maybe Cynthia. Right? I think that the the complex part is the when when you read it
Rodolfo Miranda: the credential representation all day.
Rodolfo Miranda: all the stuff.
Alex: Oh.
Alex: yeah, the thing is like, if you like. Do you have like? Do you have to support like the requesting of credential, like in the like, in the issuing of credential
Alex: all of that kind of stuff. So yeah.
Lance Byrd: and then
Lance Byrd: in some ways does this dovetail with the discovery?
Lance Byrd: A protocol? Because
Lance Byrd: I mean the at least that's the way that at a high level they talk about did come V. 2 is like oh, you know Well, at the very least, you know you have this messaging layer that you can at least approach another agent and say.
Lance Byrd: you know high right like you try to get started with each other, and then you can discover what that that agent or mediator supports in order to figure out, You know at what level you can
Lance Byrd: do business right
Lance Byrd: so. But like
Lance Byrd: do you, is, is is the this features of Wacky? Would that fit within that discovery protocol?
Lance Byrd: Or is that
Lance Byrd: a different little lay level or layer, because you know, a lot of times we've talked about the discovery protocol just in terms of like, what application protocols do you support?
Lance Byrd: But like. Can you dive deep enough to say I do, Wacky. But I don't do bbs plus
Lance Byrd: same by now. Yeah.
Rodolfo Miranda: yeah, it's not to testify. So you you. You can do whatever you want, but both parties should know what they are telling.
Rodolfo Miranda: It's not the the protocol is
Rodolfo Miranda: flexible enough to to do whatever you want to also extend that to
Rodolfo Miranda: 2 other
Rodolfo Miranda: thanks. But.
Rodolfo Miranda: I think we we need this, this
Rodolfo Miranda: Rfc. To be included, and really tell what what it means for that.
Lance Byrd: because I I guess my sense is, you know.
Lance Byrd: I think we're saying like really important things here.
Lance Byrd: My sense is that this scope is, is is widening or is wide enough.
Lance Byrd: And even at the just the wacky level, that
Lance Byrd: yeah, there needs to be this negotiation that basically says, like.
Lance Byrd: there's a lot that we could all be supporting. This is what I support, and and at least being able to transfer that amount of information so that 2 agents could know
Lance Byrd: what they can do.
Hakan: Yeah, but I I I think that's the part of the profiles that are defined also in the discount spec right? We do have these 3 profiles right now that it can be one or 4 in total
Hakan: did a IP, one a IP 2 with encryption envelope, old IP 2 with the encryption develop new, and this Con V. 2. Basically
Hakan: So I guess
Hakan: there would be a chance to actually increase the amount of profiles that that are supported like I don't see why that would be a problem
Hakan: like, for example. Yeah.
Lance Byrd: yes, sorry. I I guess i'm worried that we are discovering that
Lance Byrd: having a
Lance Byrd: profile that's like.
Lance Byrd: Okay, this is the set of things that I support, and i'm going to give it a label, right? I. It's sounding to me like
Lance Byrd: that may not scale like the that. That's not possible anymore that there's so many different
Lance Byrd: elements
Lance Byrd: that it's more like.
Lance Byrd: How do I present to you everything that I can do? And you can present to me everything you can do, and then we can decide how we are going to interrupt
Lance Byrd: right like, you know, if you only speak India and I in the credentials, let's say, and I don't do that.
Lance Byrd: then we know we can't get started. But maybe we find out. You know I support Indie and Bbs and you for Jason Ld. And Bbs. And now we can. We can. We can go ahead and and negotiate to use Pbs. Or something like that, like,
Lance Byrd: if i'm talking crazy, you know, but that i'm starting to get this sense that it's
Lance Byrd: that that yeah, just this labeling of a of an aip might be difficult.
Lance Byrd: so then, that that the new aip should be something more of like, how do we discover
Lance Byrd: how to interrupt with each other?
Hakan: But yeah, I might be getting to Meta just just thoughts. Yeah, I I I think it's it's very, very like, quite quite meta.
Lance Byrd: Yeah.
Lance Byrd: and which which I kind of hate, by the way, but you know I I the bottom line is, I don't see a clear path yet, because you guys are bringing up such good
Lance Byrd: nuanced questions. I mean, I think, that Jf. Activity was so important to
Lance Byrd: kind of expose
Lance Byrd: the variety that that can occur. And so they chose this shortest path right? And
Alex: I guess, in my opinion I see kind of like what you're saying is like you're trying to figure out what signatures you support right. Like, hey? Do we support the signal signature types
Alex: the same like low level cryptography.
Alex: But in my experience the low-level cryptography, like depends on a like use case basis, like at the application level it
Alex: and the
Alex: I don't think you can exchange
Alex: cryptography
Alex: at maybe like at an agent basis.
Alex: Maybe you can, because the agent
Alex: well, but the question is like, now, does the agent have to support, like all the lower level cryptography, or like, can that be delegated to other parties right?
Alex: Because I guess what i'm trying to say is that
Alex: some some issue or like in the issue credential flow. They might support Jwt.
Alex: but they might not so
Alex: like to find that they find that
Alex: a format exchange, like whatever like signatures you support like within the messages within walking.
Alex: So I think it's.
Alex: i'm not sure that we can exchange keys at the
Alex: it at the agent level like key format, because
Alex: you would exchange it like a application like use case level
Alex: like
Alex: another agent doesn't care what your agent does with key management.
Alex: That's the way I think about it, like whatever like your agent does with key management. What is it? Support? It's like an internal thing.
Alex: and then
Alex: you want to expose that at the application level. Hey? For this use case this credential was signed with this P.
Alex: Does that make sense?
Alex: I'm not sure I can. I'm wording it properly
Lance Byrd: to some degree it it makes sense to me, having not implemented at the level that you have.
Lance Byrd: I I just basically take your word for it.
Lance Byrd: but so so well, I guess. What?
Lance Byrd: Yeah, it's still going back to based on what you're saying. I'm still going back to this concept of a discovery protocol. And if that's discovering application.
Lance Byrd: level protocols that you support, are you saying that there could be richer information.
Lance Byrd: more detail about
Lance Byrd: that application, protocol, and some of the nuance of things that you would have to support within it.
Alex: Right? Exactly like do you have to like some sub protocol like support like within, like walk is like, hey? I don't do like the like. The request proof
Alex: like I don't I don't request for credential to issue your credential for some whatever reason, right
Alex: or hey in this group chat like, I don't support having like an admin in my group Chat protocol.
Alex: But yeah, then, like it becomes like, how do you define protocols? So yeah, it's
Rodolfo Miranda: maybe one way to to define this and how to work with this to cover, discover features. Protocol, because I think it's it's generic and body for for this aip
Rodolfo Miranda: a 3 we can define. Okay in discovery. You need to support at least this support with roles. You you
Rodolfo Miranda: you can handle with protocols some specific protocols on the way. You should, specifically, if they are nuances within each protocol like they walk you as I. I support
Rodolfo Miranda: what key or issue credential 3 in this formula, something like that, and and we specify, how should we state on the on the discovery protocol.
Rodolfo Miranda: That can be one way.
Lance Byrd: Yeah.
Alex: I guess something that I saw in the Acupy meeting. They had like handshake protocols in the message
Alex: for like showing
Alex: what's it called working with
Alex: the
Alex: Okay. Now, do you open?
Alex: Yeah, like, I said that they have some like handshake protocols like in there.
Alex: I wasn't sure what was their thought behind that
Alex: he has something similar.
Alex: I don't want to have like a new field.
Rodolfo Miranda: so so on the on the table. How can you you add them?
Rodolfo Miranda: Okay. This is the V 2 protocol. I see that this is exchange. Do we need that
Rodolfo Miranda: in this one
Hakan: to the Exchange.
Rodolfo Miranda: Yeah.
Hakan: I think so.
Hakan: I think so. I I I think so because I think it's it. It came from a IP. 2 point all for did come v. 2 conformity. So we we're exchanging. We're moving from connections protocol to the Exchange protocol.
Hakan: And if it's a public did, it can be resolved via the Did exchange. And if we are going for a
Hakan: going for a period, for example. in that case it can be done with using an out of band protocol.
Hakan: which which also is a part of
Hakan: well. It's seen as a part of the exchange
Hakan: for my understanding did exchange is how Aries deals with
Hakan: I think threats from from Didcom V. 2 specification.
Rodolfo Miranda: Okay, I need to check that. Yeah, that's part of it. Is
Rodolfo Miranda: this change?
Hakan: Yeah.
Hakan: So those are a bit old, comments.
Hakan: I I will. I will need to go through this document again to
Rodolfo Miranda: so based to to solve the did it key us as well. Yeah.
Rodolfo Miranda: yeah.
Rodolfo Miranda: you're gonna to use to it. Key. You need did this change. But you, if you use, did it, you basically
Rodolfo Miranda: don't need it just as we play back today
Rodolfo Miranda: to the URL that is in the the
Hakan: i'm not sure if I understood you. Sorry.
Rodolfo Miranda: because
Rodolfo Miranda: I think if you, if you
Rodolfo Miranda: you, you you can create a an out of one and just the the other party. Can
Rodolfo Miranda: we solve the Didn't. P. And that's inside the out of one, and we play back to you because in the Ddp. Are you gonna have this service endpoint, and you're gonna have the URL how to communicate back. So you you don't need the protocol to
Rodolfo Miranda: understand it. They They they did it
Rodolfo Miranda: the did from the 2 parties right.
Rodolfo Miranda: the one who received the out of
Rodolfo Miranda: which which is that did it Pr. From the Creator of the outcome. But and when you replay back you actually you send your did so. I can create the connection
Hakan: exactly. But you still need to the exchange, because all of this stuff is based on protocols like
Hakan: basically defining how an agent should behave when something comes to them. And I I think that's why whether it is like a peer-dit or a key, did key or a public. Did you still need to did the exchange protocol to go through? first of all, what's it again?
Hakan: the first one is exchange requests that can be with the out of bend, if it's, for example, should be broadcasted. The second thing is exchange response how the counterparty is responding to it. And then there is the exchange complete as the last step.
Hakan: and all agents needs to go through this to
Hakan: gets
Hakan: create like internally in Aries clients, a
Hakan: connection, Id and the connection situation that I've established or completed.
Rodolfo Miranda: Okay, okay. Well, yeah, that's that's because yeah, they in the eighties, probably they on the framework. They implement that way. So it's it's fine. But maybe we we need to to refine a little bit based on what did it come be to?
Rodolfo Miranda: Can provide if you are using like.
Hakan: yeah, as you, you are not using a Aries, are you or
Rodolfo Miranda: I? No, we we build like a framework without a
Rodolfo Miranda: without a without a and we tested against Agapi. So we we are playing with both right.
Rodolfo Miranda: so on and that way
Rodolfo Miranda: when we because we started, we didn't come with you, Plan didn't come with you.
Rodolfo Miranda: In that case we didn't need the the Exchange protocol because it's just one message. So it's easy in a way. Doing a visit,
Rodolfo Miranda: I did it exchange at this. Just
Rodolfo Miranda: so play we didn't come with you that we we don't need the protocol right.
Rodolfo Miranda: But if you but but we are right, because If you are using a you need this concept of of connection and some how to
Rodolfo Miranda: write it on and establish that connection when you receive the messages. So
Rodolfo Miranda: yeah, it's fine. So
Alex: so
Alex: I guess. How do we want to handle the concept of connections? And that can be to right? Because then I feel like this is like one of the big biggest, like breaking changes between V. One and V 2 is this concept of like? There's no connection, concept, and like this like whole key agreement heck up and is happening like on each message
Alex: right now.
Alex: Oh.
Alex: and in my opinion, I think in the Company 3 is going to change again.
Alex: because you can scale encryption on each message if you want to do like group things with lots of people.
Alex: so
Alex: yeah, like we want to tackle it, or maybe just
Alex: keep having this concept of connections and try to
Alex: have they come to to use the connections concept
Alex: somehow.
Alex: like using their like rotation processes, and maybe we can make a protocol that way.
Hakan: So
Hakan: from what I understood, at least the time that I was some s current and steering Koran was in the call is that we want to keep connection. Id as a
Hakan: is that abstract const as a construct to keep these information related to a connection.
Hakan: yeah, I I don't think
Hakan: so far the plan wasn't to make it disappear. Basically
Hakan: But to work with it.
Alex: Yeah, like, I think, like a person like makes sense like it makes like development a lot easier to have this like abstraction. There is of like a connection concept to like, keep track of like messages, and like
Alex: like having like a thread and whatnot. So yeah, like i'm all for it like like I myself. Haven't like figured out a way to
Alex: resolved messages like if it changes and like good rotation like I haven't had to deal with all that. So
Yeah.
Hakan: yeah.
Hakan: But speaking of this multi messaging, I think this is one of the parts that you are interested in. If I understand you correctly, because you mentioned a couple of times.
Hakan: we might need to extend the basic message protocol, and like, or or or create something like a multi messaging concept, or as a feature as an Rfc.
Hakan: if you want to. have it
Hakan: in the Didcom V: 2 profile, basically.
Yeah.
Alex: I mean, like, I'm: not. Yeah, like I'm personally interested in having like creating like a group chat out of this coming to like. I think that's just like the like, the like an easy thing.
Alex: like a low, level lift in terms of like application that can be developed. Because right now I feel like a lot of interactions like one to one, so I i'm interested to like the one to many interaction, just to see what complexity brings mainly in group like a group. Chat is the easiest implementation of that.
Yeah.
Alex: But I see the time as just being like a peer-to-peer protocol like in it of its nature, which is
Alex: yeah, like it's not pure one, too many. Right?
Yeah.
Hakan: but can be extended as you said. So. Yeah, yeah, yeah, definitely, definitely. Like, i'm interested in like trying to do that work as well. Yeah.
see
Lance Byrd: trying to fill in our meeting page real quick. I created it and posted a link for anybody wants to put themselves on, although I think we already have
Lance Byrd: he in Rudolfo Alex. So I think we have everybody who is on confluence
Lance Byrd: on there.
Lance Byrd: and I'm just adding some of our notes
Hakan: you that you don't have hyper ledger access, right? So the Hyper Ledger Foundation.
Judith Högerl: And not only
Hakan: okay.
Lance Byrd: okay, so
Lance Byrd: do we just wanna maybe we let's do quick update on on just People's did Com. V: 2 activities as well.
Lance Byrd: It's always nice to keep up with each other.
Lance Byrd: and we haven't heard yeah, from each person just what they're up to. So
Lance Byrd: yeah for me.
Lance Byrd: what am I up to other than yeah, this stuff specifically.
Lance Byrd: Yeah, I don't have any active. Did come V: 2 activities going.
Lance Byrd: How about you anybody?
Rodolfo Miranda: I think this one is the the main one.
Judith Högerl: So, in fact, there is an open, full request for issue credential in prison proof
Judith Högerl: protocols for did come version 2. And now there's like the question how to handle connections, and then you get to get the information from connections.
Judith Högerl: and which message form it is used. And then to that the like the encryption, but also then maybe to re. When you have the information about which did conversion is used, you can actually reuse some of that come out of the like
Judith Högerl: aip, one and 2 also.
Judith Högerl: But yeah, the connection is the big issue. Also to continue.
Lance Byrd: How's the level of support for that activity. for you, Judith, is is it basically that that that Hawkin? And then, whatever meetings you guys attend in terms of like occupy, or whatever is that is that where you're getting the most support, or or is there.
Lance Byrd: or like the currents supporting you or anybody else, or Daniel Hardman, or I guess the
Lance Byrd: the diff
Lance Byrd: user group.
Lance Byrd: I'm. Just interested in terms of, you know. Like, are are we? It is there more?
Judith Högerl: I mean, I got a feedback today to for the call request, but also like, yeah. Then there's this meeting
Judith Högerl: you to meeting, and yeah, like, there's the other meeting for Akup, which I cannot attend on Tuesday, because
Judith Högerl: i'm not free on those days. But yeah, so how can it tends that? And then. Yeah, and they have many things for talking.
Hakan: So in in terms of support, I think we have a lot of I mean ideas, and like, for example, there was some. I made also a couple of comments on Judith's pull request.
Hakan: Oh, good! So we are. We are getting feedback, but like in terms of muscle. It's very limited, and it's basically due to so far for the Ziptone V: 2 in areas implemented a a of a comp implementation.
Lance Byrd: Yeah. Fair.
Hakan: Yeah.
Lance Byrd: Okay.
Lance Byrd: So so in terms of like talking about connections, what is
Lance Byrd: what are some ideas for? How we can accelerate that conversation?
Judith Högerl: Well, in my opinion, like one important step would be maybe to make out of band working for the message structure did company to as well.
Judith Högerl: and then there would be a way to establish like. How can I already said like there would be a way to establish a did come v 2 connection by having an out of that protocol working for it to come. V to message structure.
Judith Högerl: And then yeah. From there you would have the information. Okay, we're using to commit to. And then you can basically use the protocols from.
Judith Högerl: and that company, too, as well.
Judith Högerl: That would be one approach, For example.
Judith Högerl: I don't know.
Hakan: Yeah. And due to the limited site that we have, because it's like a massive uses as well like, we will need to come up with some results like by end of February middle of March, or something like that. So
Hakan: that's why
Hakan: I personally would like to go for a more pragmatic approach of
Hakan: defining a profile, saying that this is what it supports it. And yeah, tackle how we can
Hakan: just make it happen basically if it's going to be to encryption of a low-place message structure for
Hakan: basic messaging, issuing credentials and presenting proofs.
Hakan: and of course, establishment of Aries connections.
Lance Byrd: Okay.
Lance Byrd: Yes, I guess. Well, you know
Lance Byrd: one thing that well, whenever we get to kind of this
Lance Byrd: place, where you know we have some meta discussions, and then, you know we also have these actual implementations going on. I think that's really good. and it helps to constrain us. we do have a a customer, you know, not only a roots Id itself doing to come be, too, but we have
Lance Byrd: customers who are interested in customers who are actually implementing
Lance Byrd: d comedy to as well. So
Lance Byrd: hopefully, we can use
Lance Byrd: the intersection of of these implementations to
Lance Byrd: to to, you know, come to
Lance Byrd: come to terms with, you know, being grounded not being so, Meta. you know that's partly why I I kind of started building the spreadsheet.
Lance Byrd: I wish that I was more.
Lance Byrd: You know, a lot of times when I do these kinds of things like I have a very clear vision that I really want to drive on, and in this case,
Lance Byrd: there's just more information to together.
Lance Byrd: So what am I trying to say? I'm trying to say that I want to capture the actual details of these implementations in the spreadsheet, so that we can properly discuss
Lance Byrd: individual pieces
Lance Byrd: and and so i'm. I'm. Open to ideas and energy and and thoughts. You know. I want to to help
Lance Byrd: capture these things, but it's hard right, because i'm not doing the implementation. Other people are doing the implementation, and there's multiple of them on going. So I just want everyone to know that i'm trying to grapple with like, how do we
Lance Byrd: use this, this so valuable information of of these implementations going on, and and I think it's
Lance Byrd: honestly the occupy work
Lance Byrd: is unique. at least from my point of view, because, like like Rhoda said, you know, we just started with did come V. 2. So we we kind of don't have that.
Lance Byrd: They come. V. One
Lance Byrd: constraint. Yeah, the the back issue, or the legacy of it as much weighing on us and our customer doesn't, either.
Lance Byrd: and but
Lance Byrd: that's why they occupy stuff so valuable. Because there are going there, you know, these important implementations are, do do have this legacy. So yeah.
Lance Byrd: I said, a lot of words.
Alex: Yeah, I think, like even like bringing the guys that are like outside the hyper ledger ecosystem, they might have like a different total view on how to handle this, and like how we can like interrupt with them as well and like. They might have like an interesting
Alex: to to say like how we can leverage different like profiles, and from that perspective. So
Lance Byrd: so
Lance Byrd: maybe I, I will take that as a a
Lance Byrd: a task, or or if if Alex, You feel like you want to reach out to them and try to figure out how we can get them, either in this meeting or
Lance Byrd: at least capture their work.
Alex: Yeah, I think like, yeah, maybe Nick can get here because he's like on the East Coast. It's like he's in New York. So yeah, i'll let him know about this, although he has been attending the deaf once
Lance Byrd: an and and by the way, this meeting having this before the diff meeting, I think, is helping in terms of right capturing that audience as well. So
Alex: yeah, maybe we can bring it up. That
Hakan: okay, we have 2 min left. So a little up from my side. I will, or we will talk of in the next a cup I implementation group a kapak, about which encryption envelope to go for or like.
Hakan: see whether.
Hakan: and because there's so many different ones, including like a native implementation of it on a
Hakan: So question comes to which one do we want to use? And I think that would be also play a role in. Yeah, what Alex was mentioning about like how to deal with key exchange. And all those things are on that encryption envelope level basically
Hakan: of this call implementation. So
Hakan: yeah, I will update you next time.
Hakan: but I I think we'll see each other next Monday, anyway, before that call it's called happens on Tuesdays.
Lance Byrd: Yeah, a fair.
Lance Byrd: Any other thoughts.
and then
Lance Byrd: I I think I I do, I I I
Lance Byrd: This is the first time that i'm thinking
Lance Byrd: towards like a more detailed form of discovery. It just seems to me to be so valuable if there really is a way to for agents to tell each other.
Lance Byrd: these are all the things that I support you know, with much more detail than maybe what we've kind of thought of in the discovery
Lance Byrd: protocol in the past. So I mean that's for me a big takeaway from this like. Is there a more detailed way for agents to
Lance Byrd: you know? Talk about their
Lance Byrd: encryption, envelope, and things like that. So
Lance Byrd: yeah, Any other thoughts? I think it's really good.
Lance Byrd: Okay, All right. We did it. Sorry that I was late. I i'll do better next time
Lance Byrd: these contractor Cabinet folks are killing me. That's why that was my personal problem. Thank you all. It's always great to see you. I really appreciate this meeting. Yeah, See you all bye, bye, bye, bye.
Alex: Thank you.