Skip to content

Conversation

@TheBonheurs
Copy link
Member

What's Changed

New Contributors

Voles and others added 30 commits April 18, 2025 11:31
Since a Group can only be used in a single network, it makes sense to add this information to the rules & restrictions of a Group.
This makes it easier for users to understand where a Group is located.
Eg. public internet or DigiNetwerk.

When this MR is merged, the Digikoppeling Koppelvlakstandaard REST-API needs to be updated with the network being used.
See https://gitdocumentatie.logius.nl/publicatie/dk/restapi/#federated-service-connectivity-standaard-fsc
The column is listing grant types, not hash types.
…parate codes

Since it is not clear if the receiver should check if the receiver
or the submitter should be part of the Contract. This becomes more clear
if we introduce two error codes instead of one:

1. `ERROR_CODE_SUBMITTING_PEER_NOT_PART_OF_CONTRACT`
2. `ERROR_CODE_RECEIVING_PEER_NOT_PART_OF_CONTRACT`
Add Network-decision to the list when defining a Group
Replace error code ERROR_CODE_PEER_NOT_PART_OF_CONTRACT with two separate codes.
Dan wordt hij correct meegenomen in de publicatie.
…#25)

* add properties object to grants

Each Grant can contain an optional properties object that can be used to provide extra information.
This makes it easier to extend FSC with additional functionality.

* update hash creation instructions

Use RFC8785 JSON Canonicalization Scheme to create consistent JSON objects.
Because the objects are consistent they create consitent hashes.
By using the RFC FSC core no longer needs to define how the JSON objects should be handled to create consistent hashes.

* Add details about the JSON format to the protocol section

* Remove dots at end of the line for consistency

* Remove duplicate details about the usage of JCS

* Formatting

* Add clarification about the allowed properties

* update grant hash section

make it more clear that the Canonical JSON should represented as a string

* Fix ref

---------

Co-authored-by: Ronald Koster <ronald.koster07@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: ndequeker <niels@nd-software.be>
Co-authored-by: Stas Mironov <staspas@hotmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Alexander Green <alexander.green@logius.nl>
Since we've decided to consolidate Group and Profile into 'Group', we should remove 'profile' everywhere.

Initial PR: #3

Co-authored-by: ndequeker <niels@nd-software.be>
By including the FSC version in the contract it becomes possible to determine
if a Manager is compatible with the contract

This will help users with:
- debugging
- only accepting Contracts with an FSC version that the receiving Manager can comply with (eg. older versions)

Co-authored-by: Ronald Koster <ronald.koster07@gmail.com>
* update the delegated connection diagrams

The previous diagrams created some confusing because the submit contract step was not properly placed.
And in the real world the Delegatee will most likely create the contract instead of the Delegator.

* improve guiding texts of the diagrams

---------

Co-authored-by: Ronald Koster <ronald.koster07@gmail.com>
* Add error code for unknown FSC version

* The `fsc_version` property is required when submitting a Contract
Co-authored-by: Ronald Koster <ronald.koster07@gmail.com>
TheBonheurs and others added 5 commits January 8, 2026 15:35
Hiermee worden automatisch `Status:` labels toegevoegd
aan PRs als er activiteit op komt (openen, closen of
een review).
* Ensure request / response bodies consistently use `content` for the Contract content.

Instead of mixing `contract_content` and `content`. That is unnecessary and confusing.

* Fix property name `algorithm` -> `hash_algorithm` for the Content hash section

`algorithm` is not used. The correct property name from the OAS is `hash_algorithm`.

* Remove redundant `contract.` prefix from the content hash section

* Fix reference to wrong step number 13 in the content hash section

* Fix property name `algorithm` -> `hash_algorithm` for the Grant hash section

`algorithm` is not used. The correct property name from the OAS is `hash_algorithm`.
* allow outways based on domain name

In a (Delegated) Service Connection Grant an Outway can be specified
based on domain name. Previously only a public key thumbprint was
allowed. An Outway must have the domain name specified as a Subject
Alternative Name in its certificate to be allowed to request an access
token. By allowing domain names Contracts won't have to be renewed when
the Outway renews its certificate and rotates its keypair.

* missing colon

Co-authored-by: Niels Dequeker <niels@dqkr.be>

---------

Co-authored-by: Ronald Koster <ronald.koster07@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Stas Mironov <stas.mironov@logius.nl>
Co-authored-by: Niels Dequeker <niels@dqkr.be>
* add properties to service listings

Properties defined in the ServicePublicationGrant and
DelegatedServicePublicationGrants should be included in the service
listing.

* included the delegated service publication grant in directory section

The delegated service publication grant was missing in the behavior
description of the Directory

* github actions fix

* remove space

* rerun checks

---------

Co-authored-by: Ronald Koster <ronald.koster07@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Stas Mironov <stas.mironov@logius.nl>
Co-authored-by: Stas M <staspas@hotmail.com>
@TheBonheurs TheBonheurs added this to the Release 2.0 milestone Jan 15, 2026
@github-actions github-actions bot added the Status: In bewerking Het voorstel is in bewerking bij de beheerorganisatie. label Jan 15, 2026
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 15, 2026

ronaldkoster and others added 4 commits January 15, 2026 16:52
Use the same phrasing in the content hash and grant hash sections
and reference the correct steps.

Co-authored-by: Ronald Koster <ronald.koster07@gmail.com>
@TheBonheurs TheBonheurs moved this from Intake to Review in Digikoppeling board Feb 2, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Status: In bewerking Het voorstel is in bewerking bij de beheerorganisatie.

Projects

Status: Review

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants