clarifications about how many credentials can be issued using the same AT #326
Conversation
peppelinux
requested review from
tlodderstedt,
awoie,
Sakurann,
jogu,
pmhsfelix,
paulbastian and
bc-pi
| @@ -698,7 +698,7 @@ The Credential Endpoint issues a Credential as approved by the End-User upon pre | |||
|
|
|||
| Communication with the Credential Endpoint MUST utilize TLS. | |||
|
|
|||
| The Client can request issuance of a Credential of a certain type multiple times, e.g., to associate the Credential with different public keys/Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) or to refresh a certain Credential. | |||
| The Client can request issuance of a Credential of a certain type multiple times, e.g., to associate the Credential with different public keys/Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) or to refresh a certain Credential. It is at the Credential Issuer's discretion how many copies of a Credential it is willing to issue, how often, and whether reissued Credentials automatically update if the underlying claims have changed. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
err, PR #293 here on line 1399 introduces batch_size, so there is a way for the issuer to communicate how many credentials it is willing to issue in a batch, so it is a little more than "at the discretion of the issuer".
also I am not sure what "automatically update" means. there is no way for the issuer to push into the wallet an updated credential, the wallet need to talk to the credential endpoint explicitly to get credentials refreshed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would be ok with this
The Client can request the issuance of a Credential of a certain type multiple times,
for example, to associate the Credential with different public keys or Decentralized
Identifiers (DIDs), or to refresh a certain Credential. However, it is important to
note that the ability to do so depends on whether the Issuer supports the multiple
issuance of the same Credential Type or the refresh of the Credential.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would rather prefer this as a suggestion in PR#293 to avoid the merge conflict.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes we can do this, see: #293 (comment)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this PR still relevant?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
per comments here https://github.com/openid/OpenID4VCI/pull/326/files#r1613666445
|
I believe this was resolved in PR #293 as per #293 (comment) - closing. |
This PR aims to resolve part of the comments shared in the issue #313