Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

OOB Handling of both 1.0 and 1.1 messages #1917

Closed
swcurran opened this issue Aug 26, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1940
Closed

OOB Handling of both 1.0 and 1.1 messages #1917

swcurran opened this issue Aug 26, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1940
Assignees

Comments

@swcurran
Copy link
Contributor

It appears that ACA-Py is not handling OOB messages for both protocol version 1.0 and 1.1, as it should be. Per Aries RFC 0003, ACA-Py should be able to handle all minor versions of a protocol. Please investigate.

See this comment on an AFJ issue with details about what is happening.

@JamesKEbert -- could you please add steps to reproduce?

Thanks!

@swcurran
Copy link
Contributor Author

@shaangill025 -- can you please take a look at this when you have some time?

First off, it would be nice to know what version(s) of the OOB protocol that ACA-Py supports, and where is the error happening?

Thanks!

@JamesKEbert
Copy link

The steps to reproduce are a little less straightforward unfortunately, as this was created using a combination of the Aries Toolbox + AFJ running in a RN context.

The biggest thing to note is we utilized the ACA-Py configs public-invites: true and seed: PLACE_SEED_HERE and then posted the agent endpoint with the API endpoint wallet/set-did-endpoint.

We created two OOB invitations via /out-of-band/create-invitation with the params auto_accept:true and multi_use:false and the following body:

{
  "alias": "TestAgent",
  "attachments": [
  ],
  "handshake_protocols": [
    "did:sov:BzCbsNYhMrjHiqZDTUASHg;spec/connections/1.0"
  ],
  "my_label": "Toolbox-Public-DID",
  "use_public_did": true
}

The first invitation is used to establish the connection, and the second invitation to trigger a connection reuse.

We could get a Mobile Agent APK created either today or Monday with the mobile behavior from the AFJ 930 PR.

Although now that I think about it, @swcurran is the connection reuse case handled in AATH?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants