Did-dht-method Alternatives

Similar projects and alternatives to did-dht-method based on common topics and language

did-core

50 392 0.6 HTML did-dht-method VS did-core

W3C Decentralized Identifier Specification v1.0
ORCID-Source

10 351 9.8 Java did-dht-method VS ORCID-Source

ORCID Open Source Project
InfluxDB

www.influxdata.com featured

Power Real-Time Data Analytics at Scale. Get real-time insights from all types of time series data with InfluxDB. Ingest, query, and analyze billions of data points in real-time with unbounded cardinality.
pkarr

4 105 8.8 Rust did-dht-method VS pkarr

Public Key Addressable Resource Records (sovereign TLDs)
bittorrent.org

3 378 0.0 HTML did-dht-method VS bittorrent.org
did-spec-registries

1 112 6.5 HTML did-dht-method VS did-spec-registries

DID Spec Registry (Note)
ssi-service

1 150 8.4 Go did-dht-method VS ssi-service

The Self Sovereign Identity Service
go-pdu

0 46 7.0 Go did-dht-method VS go-pdu

Go implementation of PDU - A decentralized SNS backbone
SaaSHub

www.saashub.com featured

SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews. SaaSHub helps you find the best software and product alternatives

NOTE: The number of mentions on this list indicates mentions on common posts plus user suggested alternatives. Hence, a higher number means a better did-dht-method alternative or higher similarity.

Suggest an alternative to did-dht-method

did-dht-method reviews and mentions

Posts with mentions or reviews of did-dht-method. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects. The last one was on 2024-04-19.

9 Things You Didn't Know About Decentralized Identifiers
5 projects | dev.to | 19 Apr 2024

TBD is the company I work at. It's a business unit within Block. created its own DID method called DID:DHT. DHT stands for Distributed Hash Table indicating the use of Mainline DHT. You can learn more about DID:DHT via the spec and this blog post from TBD’s Director of Open Standards, Gabe Cohen.
The Did DHT Method Specification 1.0
2 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 24 Feb 2024

This is pretty neat, but you should publish a spec for Pkarr -- the layer below did-dht -- first. Right now Pkarr is a software program/library, not a specification. I think this will help you simplify and articulate your work more clearly to people who aren't immersed in it. I think it will also be extremely useful to people who don't need the incredible complexity of w3c DIDs.
The choice to sign an entire DNS packet seems very strange and probably hasn't been through through properly.
Why use DNS packets? Presumably because you want to leverage the existing infrastrucure of recursive DNS resolvers. However these resolvers do not preserve packets!. If I send a query to my recursive resolver, and it makes a query to the authoritative server, it can (and almost always does) modify the resulting packet from the authoritative before returning a reply to me.
The upshot here is: if you're signing packets, almost all recursive resolvers will destroy your signatures. This is why DNSSEC signs individual resource records instead of packets. I think that's what you want to be doing: sign an RR, not a packet. If you absolutely need to sign multiple RRs, you'll need to specify a canonical way to assemble the RRs (i.e. sort them). But I really think you want to sign a single RR, which includes the hash of other RRs.
Lastly, please take this issue more seriously: https://github.com/TBD54566975/did-dht-method/issues/80#issu... the only response given was that "the DHT-DID [spec] uses Pkarr [a piece of software]" which makes no sense... specs depend on specs, not implementations. Then the issue derailed (as unthreaded discussions always do... gee thanks github for ruining everything) into some side tangent about KRPC and CBOR instead of addressing "why DNS?".