Is this in response to my proposal? I think I'm lost here.

ChipTuner

npub1qdjn8j4gwgmkj3k5un775nq6q3q7mguv5tvajstmkdsqdja2havq03fqm7

hex

02cb294506a6ce8b9e3e551ff3b8227ccd823f30dbfacd348287fb0fc4ebd43e

nevent

nevent1qqsq9jefg5r2dn5tncl928lnhq38envz8ucdh7kdxjpg07c0cn4ag0sprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem4d36kwatvw5hx6mm9qgsqxefne258ydmfgm2wfl02fsdqgs0d5wx29kweg9amxcqxew4t7kqp3w5wc

Kind-1 (TextNote)

2026-06-09T18:52:21Z

↳ Reply to Event not found

dc4550f90060dad73e17c4cbc0b8715637af00c8e57a0c2f04fbab8151fdfb9a...

Is this in response to my proposal? I think I'm lost here.

The idea would be publish kind 10100 that establishes information about the tree. New events can optionally add a finterprint (npub) to the ancestor it wishes to publish for. Client pulls kind 10100 on itself, then climbs the tree of 10100 until it finds the matching npub in it's delegation list. If the tree ends and never found, invalid. If an ancestor revoked any point in the chain, then the timestamps are compared to determine historical validity. If any discrepancy, the chain is considered valid up to it's most valid ancestor if the fingerprint on the event is not part of the resolved chain, it was not granted permission.

Do be clear this doesn't establish primary key rotation. its loosely akin to x509 chains where we add separation between usage of keys.

Raw JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "02cb294506a6ce8b9e3e551ff3b8227ccd823f30dbfacd348287fb0fc4ebd43e",
  "pubkey": "036533caa872376946d4e4fdea4c1a0441eda38ca2d9d9417bb36006cbaabf58",
  "created_at": 1781031141,
  "tags": [
    [
      "e",
      "f9901260bc194e772513aa63bc4c5e4696eaaad9168d08f4d547c18e46eae264",
      "",
      "root",
      "577de06dce160a0379163a4bb7b680be3e0a0e1c68de6e6ba8c01134b44064dd"
    ],
    [
      "e",
      "dc4550f90060dad73e17c4cbc0b8715637af00c8e57a0c2f04fbab8151fdfb9a",
      "wss://nos.lol/",
      "reply",
      "576d23dc3db2056d208849462fee358cf9f0f3310a2c63cb6c267a4b9f5848f9"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "577de06dce160a0379163a4bb7b680be3e0a0e1c68de6e6ba8c01134b44064dd"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "32e1827635450ebb3c5a7d12c1f8e7b2b514439ac10a67eef3d9fd9c5c68e245"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "930ccef12372dd2f16057cfc54f0dbd94335d8b51b4e2737236b00cab718fcd9"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "a9434ee165ed01b286becfc2771ef1705d3537d051b387288898cc00d5c885be"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "036533caa872376946d4e4fdea4c1a0441eda38ca2d9d9417bb36006cbaabf58",
      "wss://theforest.nostr1.com/"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "d1a61498f4b1dc26df0becd1a3e9e88f355fb614b771e8b5b277d0ff99a82a23"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "576d23dc3db2056d208849462fee358cf9f0f3310a2c63cb6c267a4b9f5848f9"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "Is this in response to my proposal? I think I'm lost here. \n\nThe idea would be publish kind 10100 that establishes information about the tree. New events can optionally add a finterprint (npub) to the ancestor it wishes to publish for. Client pulls kind 10100 on itself, then climbs the tree of 10100 until it finds the matching npub in it's delegation list. If the tree ends and never found, invalid. If an ancestor revoked any point in the chain, then the timestamps are compared to determine historical validity. If any discrepancy, the chain is considered valid up to it's most valid ancestor if the fingerprint on the event is not part of the resolved chain, it was not granted permission. \n\nDo be clear this doesn't establish primary key rotation. its loosely akin to x509 chains where we add separation between usage of keys. ",
  "sig": "1192e329d4da1b154476b9eb91be837b87882de520df40f3978bfa50e4c1a65617669177b69820c2184f953302795ebf68496bed975be05b175386e4a1829d41"
}