[Openid-specs-ab] SIOP special topic call minutes (2021-06-24)
Kristina.Yasuda at microsoft.com
Mon Jun 28 06:58:03 UTC 2021
Regarding a DIF call to revise PE spec, the DIF C&C WG chairs told they want to set aside a time separately, so no need to join the call on today - will update, once we know the exact time when PE revision related special call will be set up.
> I have requested Claims & Credentials WG in DIF to put on the agenda PE-related issues during the next call that will be on June 28th at 10am Pacific time, 7pm Berlin time, and 5am NZ time. Please be there if you are interested in revising the current version of PE. https://identity.foundation/working-groups/claims-credentials.html
差出人: Kristina Yasuda <Kristina.Yasuda at microsoft.com>
送信日時: 2021年6月25日 2:52
宛先: openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net <openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net>
件名: SIOP special topic call minutes (2021-06-24)
Axel Nennker (Deutche Telecom)
Stephane Durand (Thales)
- IPR reminder & introductions/re-introductions
- Agenda bashing/adoption
- External events and organizations
- Identiverse 2021
* Merged. Jeremie also approved.
* David C. agreed to file an issue in Connect Bitbucket that "schema" should be called "type" in PE. There is already a similar issue in DIF PE github repository
* We agreed that while approaching DIF PE Working Group, we will also document in Bitbucket the changes that we want to see in PE spec to make it more compatible with OpenID Connect.
* I have requested Claims & Credentials WG in DIF to put on the agenda PE-related issues during the next call that will be on June 28th at 10am Pacific time, 7pm Berlin time, and 5am NZ time. Please be there if you are interested in revising the current version of PE. https://identity.foundation/working-groups/claims-credentials.html
* new / PE-related: https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues/1244/correct-the-schema-propertys-value-within
* Closed the issue because it was addressed in merged PR #22.
* new / PE-related: https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues/1243/move-pe-definition-to-correct-property
* David C. suggested changing verifiable_presentations to presentation_definition.
* Torsten pointed out that that will not work with vp_token request syntax which directly embeds input_descriptors in vp_token clam
* Jeremie suggested a simple way to support both needs by simply using the presentation_definition property within the verifiable_presentations claim request.
* Torsten alerady created a PR: https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/pull-requests/23/introduce-presentation_definition-element
* new / PE-related: https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues/1245/correct-the-format-propertys-name-location
* OIDC4VP draft puts format property from the presentatio exchange request into the registration metadata, according to the philosophy of OpenID Connect - while keeping the schema defined in the PE spec as Torsten pointed out.
* We discussed the possibility of putting format property in the request and be compliant with the PE specification, but unanimously agreed that to keep the current choice. The reason is - format element is not credential or presentation specific, it is a static information that applies to all the credentials and presentations that the client requests and OP can handle. In OpenID Connect, Server and Client metadata is typically where such information is being handled.
* David C. said that this choice is consistent to his implementation experience.
* Kristina asked how can formats of both VP and VC be specified.
* Stephane pointed out that in some issues we preserve PE syntax, while in some issues we prioritize OpenID Connect philosophy.
* Passing by reference PE request object in the request URL: https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues/1238/requesting-verifiable-presentation
* We discussed that passing policy, aka entire presentation exchange request structure, by reference, where a URI is trusted because it belongs to a trust framework can be "readily usable for policy/framework use cases with SIOP and presentations where there is a larger agreement in place on the authority of the hosted request objects". Jeremie already made a comment to the issue that summarizes the discussion really well.
* SIOP V2
* We did not have time to go through these issues. Kristina encouraged to read and comment on the two following issues in particular:
* An issue back from 2018: https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues/1027/write-a-self-issued-idp-si-idp-best
* Progress on SIOP properties: https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues/1239/we-should-stop-using-siop-as-an-umbrella
There was a question at the end of the call how to join SIOP Special call Mailing List. You can do so by joining Connect WG ML here: https://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Openid-specs-ab