Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

DIP-263 Use User Data for Public Keys #276

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 7, 2024

Conversation

wesbiggs
Copy link
Member

Problem

See #263

Solution

  • Moved old Public Key Announcement to "Migrated Announcements".
  • Added Avro type PublicKey.
  • Updated User Data section to define key agreement and assertion method key types.

@wesbiggs wesbiggs requested a review from wilwade April 11, 2024 21:34
@@ -190,12 +191,12 @@ The following example illustrates the output of a Get User Data Operation invoca
{
"data": base64_string,
"etag": string,
"keyId": integer
"keyIndex": integer
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Would this be a change to the https://github.com/LibertyDSNP/graph-sdk/ that needs to happen?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think this "example" JSON serialization is used directly in graph-sdk, but @aramikm or Joe might know better. I'll get some more eyes on it. If there's prior art out there using keyId I'd be fine with keeping it that way for simplicity's sake, but documenting that keyId is the index.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Per Joe this won't impact graph-sdk, so resolving this thread.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

After thinking about this, I think this should just keep keyId. It is an identifier even if it applies an index algo.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agreed

Copy link
Member

@wilwade wilwade left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All looks correct to me!

@wesbiggs wesbiggs force-pushed the proposal/DIP-263_Use_User_Data_for_Public_Keys branch from 4391c5d to 5e03123 Compare June 3, 2024 13:32
Copy link
Member

@wilwade wilwade left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just updating my approval for the small additional updates.

@wesbiggs wesbiggs merged commit c407aba into main Jun 7, 2024
1 check passed
@wesbiggs wesbiggs deleted the proposal/DIP-263_Use_User_Data_for_Public_Keys branch June 7, 2024 18:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants