Skip to content

Address domain sovereignty concerns in Identity Resolver specification

Harley Thomas requested to merge domain-sovereignty into main

This MR addresses concerns raised in issue #269 (closed) regarding domain sovereignty and assumptions about URL patterns, link types, and media types in the Identity Resolver specification.

Key Changes:

  1. Added warning box after "Common Requirements" alerting readers early to domain sovereignty principles with link to detailed guidance
  2. Added comprehensive "Domain Sovereignty and URI Interpretation" section before Requirements, covering:
  • IETF BCP 190 principles
  • Verification approach for clients
  • Best practices for resolver operators and clients
  1. Updated "Resolution mechanism" to emphasize that URL structure conformance doesn't guarantee IDR service and recommend /.well-known/resolver verification
  2. Added clarifying notes in IDR LinkSet Response section about link type/media type being hints, not guarantees
  3. Added requirement IDR-14 formalizing domain sovereignty awareness obligations

Impact:

  • Clarifies that link types and media types are hints, not guarantees of content
  • Emphaises need to validate actual content after dereferencing
  • Highlights /.well-known/resolver as proper service declaration method (ISO/IEC 18975)
  • Provides concrete examples of why assumptions are dangerous
  • Maintains spec readability by placing detailed guidance after conceptual model

Closes #269 (closed)

Merge request reports