Sam Curren

Discussed WG 20221109. No objections to merge. James will add comment about a typo.

Philosophically, there is not a difference between waiting for a POST synchronous response and waiting for an inbound DIDComm message. Practically, it may be easier in an HTTP library than...

With the merged commit, I believe this becomes a deferred issue.

A backlog section is a great idea. Does that belong at the end of the spec, or in a different document?

I propose we leave the backlog in the deferred issues in this repo instead of the spec itself. Thoughts?

Discussed WG 20220110. Will leave backlog using `defer` labels in this repo rather than adding section to doc.

@dhh1128 @swcurran @rodolfomiranda ^

Fantastic Question. I'll raise this in the DIDComm WG on Monday.

Discussed in WG 20211213. The DIDComm spec will only manage messages between two parties. Multi-party coordination is a concern for a higher level construct.

The signature was in theory to verify that the other party held the associated private key, and is therefore authorized to rotate to a new DID. As long as the...