Networked multi-party turn.conversation.v1 between independently-owned agents — supported today?
Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.
Evaluación
- Dificultad
- 5/5
- Tiempo estimado
- Más de una semana
- Aptitud para principiantes
- 25/100
- Tipo de issue
- Nueva funcionalidad
- Claridad
- Bastante claro
- Estado de actividad
- Tranquilo
- Stack tecnológico
- postgresql, python, streamlit
- Área
- ai, api, distributed-systems
Línea de trabajo
Start with the Kernel v3r1 preview, especially the turn lifecycle, agent identity, cg admission invite create, cg agent join, and turn.conversation.v1; compare these with the quickstart/examples and their local Postgres assumptions. The issue is done when the current cross-host support, any admission and join reference flow, and the recommended interim path or roadmap status are documented.
Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.
Descripción
Hi CommonGround team & community 👋
I've independently built a consent-gated companion agent whose governance model rhymes closely with CG's design (append-only ledger/receipts; a hash-pinned constitutional core ≈ stable agent identity + durable commitments; exact-phrase consent gates; a reduced-privilege "diplomat" conversation mode). I'd like to use CG as the substrate for real agent-to-agent conversation, and I'm trying to understand what's possible today vs. on the roadmap.
My stack
- Orchestration: Claude Code CLI; primary model Fable 5, fallback Sonnet 4.5; multi-model routing (companion / research+vision / background)
- Runtime: Python, local-first; Streamlit control surface; exposed via Cloudflare Tunnel + Access
- Governance: dry-run → hashed backup → apply → sha256 verify → auto-rollback; PROTECTED_FILES; operator-typed approval phrases; quarantined external-memory journal with a gated promotion wall (anti-poisoning)
What I've read
Kernel v3r1 preview: Turn lifecycle, agent identity, cg admission invite create + cg agent join, turn.conversation.v1, BYOA paths. The quickstart/examples look local-first (127.0.0.1, local Postgres).
Questions
- Can two independently-owned agents on different machines/networks currently coordinate via CG — specifically exchange
turn.conversation.v1turns — or is v3r1 intended for single-host/local development for now? - If networked multi-party is possible today, is there a reference/example for the admission + join flow across hosts (auth, service exposure, credential handling)?
- If it's not ready yet, what's the recommended interim path for a governed agent-to-agent "hello" (relay, A2A, MCP), and where does that sit on the CG roadmap?
Happy to share more architecture detail or co-test. Thanks for building this — the "no agent works alone" framing resonates a lot. 💛
- Lenguaje dominante
- Python
- Estrellas
- 153
- Forks
- 21
- Métricas de merge de PR
- Sin PR fusionados en 30 d
Preparar el entorno
- Sin Dockerfile ni archivo de Docker Compose
- Tiene una plantilla de pull request
- Leer la guía de contribución
Primeros pasos
- Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
- Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
- Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
- Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.
Issues similares
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 78/100
UKGovernmentBEIS/inspect_ai#6512 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
area/c++ area/core kind/bug-report
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 78/100
tensorflow/quantum#1140 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 78/100
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Dificultad 1/5 Menos de una hora Aptitud para principiantes 68/100
Kav-K/GPTDiscord#501 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 78/100
UKGovernmentBEIS/inspect_evals#2863 · 1 comentario ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día