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

DIDCommMessaging Service Endpoint is in the wrong format #2864

Closed
conanoc opened this issue Apr 2, 2024 · 2 comments
Closed

DIDCommMessaging Service Endpoint is in the wrong format #2864

conanoc opened this issue Apr 2, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
Discuss Issues to be raised for discussion at an ACA-Pug Meeting

Comments

@conanoc
Copy link

conanoc commented Apr 2, 2024

This issue of credo-ts also exists in ACA-Py.

It's been observed that generating DIDs for did:peer:2 with a service endpoint type of DIDCommMessaging, the serviceEndpoint follows the format of the did-communication endpoint type instead of the DIDCommMessaging endpoint type.

@swcurran swcurran added the Discuss Issues to be raised for discussion at an ACA-Pug Meeting label Apr 2, 2024
@dbluhm
Copy link
Contributor

dbluhm commented Apr 2, 2024

ACA-Py is following the did-communication convention right now. This convention is defined here: https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-rfcs/blob/main/features/0067-didcomm-diddoc-conventions/README.md#service-conventions

ACA-Py is correctly adhering to this convention and has not yet adopted the DIDCommMessaging service type.

Credo, by comparison, is using the DIDCommMessaging service type but using the old did-communication conventions i.e. the serviceEndpoint is a string when it should be an object with the accept and routingKeys fields.

I'm not sure I see how this issue applies to ACA-Py at the moment. Could you elaborate?

@conanoc
Copy link
Author

conanoc commented Apr 3, 2024

I filed this issue to notice that there's a compatibility issue among peer-did libraries as listed here: decentralized-identity/peer-did-method-spec#64
At first, I thought using did-communication type services in peer-did was not conforming to the spec. Now I have learned that the spec does not specify which type to use. And maybe this is the source of the compatibility issue.

@conanoc conanoc closed this as completed Jun 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Discuss Issues to be raised for discussion at an ACA-Pug Meeting
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants