solid-contrib / webmonetization

Discussions about Solid + Web Monetization
MIT License
7 stars 2 forks source link

Payment required #4

Closed michielbdejong closed 3 years ago

michielbdejong commented 3 years ago
joepio commented 3 years ago

Flow

michielbdejong commented 3 years ago

you can buy the ticket via ILP/STREAM, to the payment pointer. https://interledger.org/rfcs/0039-stream-receipts/

michielbdejong commented 3 years ago

Maybe we want to add a step with W3C-VC, so that the ACL mentions a W3C-VC you need, and as a client you exchange your ILP/STREAM-receipt for a W3C-VC somewhere.

michielbdejong commented 3 years ago

NSS could include the service that converts the stream receipt to the vc, so that it's basically the server trusting itself, and we don't get the question of which third party is allowed to sign there.

michielbdejong commented 3 years ago

See https://github.com/solid/web-access-control-spec/issues/79 for the WAC+VC flow

michielbdejong commented 3 years ago

And https://solid.github.io/authorization-panel/authorization-ucr/#conditional-payment

michielbdejong commented 3 years ago

Continuing the generic VC part here: https://github.com/solid/authorization-panel/issues/79#issuecomment-787838852. Once that's done we can see how to do it specifically to payment. And then specifically for ILP/STREAM.

michielbdejong commented 3 years ago

Strictly speaking, for monetization the agent does not have to present the receipt. They could also just make sure their WebID is added to the list of "people who have paid", and then the resource server could just discover that list pro-actively rather than going from a link that the user agent provides. But let's see how far we get.

michielbdejong commented 3 years ago

Making this issue strictly about the 402 response header, i.e. the https://solid.github.io/authorization-panel/authorization-ucr/#req-vc-determine part of https://solid.github.io/authorization-panel/authorization-ucr/#conditional-payment.

Will fork off separate issues for the other moving parts involved.

michielbdejong commented 3 years ago

Regarding strictly the 402 response then, and what should be in that. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231#section-6.5.2 doesn't give us much to go by. https://github.com/solid/specification/pull/210#issuecomment-727820134 is relevant.

michielbdejong commented 3 years ago

See also the issue about this at the monetization-tests. See also the issue about this at node-solid-server.

michielbdejong commented 3 years ago

Done