I want to enable alexa voice control for my smart home device. I was able to discover device. Now all devices are showing in alexa app. But when I try to turn on the device from my alexa app it is getting stuck. Loader is moving unlimited period of time. It is actually calling ReportStatus directive.
This is the json that I am getting from alexa app for a light. The light has only turn on and turn off capabilities.
{
"directive": {
"endpoint": {
"cookie": {
"detail1": "For simplicity, this is the only appliance",
"detail2": "that has some values in the additionalApplianceDetails"
},
"endpointId": "endpoint-001",
"scope": {
"token": "weza|IwEBIGu_tmpSTQaEPvhm0OYy-4ncjve_Au1788TAWR2DC8b7xJlPDiX3HV3rJUtG0qyauIlman4bX4ZCK0-6NvKWagqXNLSdH3bDBLxD_9VtgCQo6wUlEd4DNmL9Yf5sWuUCkV1ALAxxbhqPs3QlTofubxtpSnF05ZWOSjyNUlM3ShryLh7owTywFa_7oXCCaLdLCTiqOm27aPn-yyJEDNG57Sc9iysrZkJHaxVPbdZdcqRmaw9zFGVWOqsgjqiojkKrfztslVL1Ggo6v7Teg8isrZD8osr5HFkWAmZHi8K7UrHmwQnsD9CosgSxSG0avnUoomdsZx3_LPjLJKf5twJrN1vbLolzOgxUbVuAVPVrs8UN40KFEu6eCv_7rYz9AER_61di-4w1K27kjeJvzPMIKlLXLvv6Z-2GyuQq_8M1fUdM0SgiAkqjf92S9SNxezTUiDYdOjB1JrktbQc0WM6OYYXOMjtXcCPx3bqNwWoPZWBk7qptLTurCHcYnnDl27Q0RcJ3u1vFvMaT8l0x87K6wqW2",
"type": "BearerToken"
}
},
"header": {
"correlationToken": "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",
"messageId": "dd8670d5-3afa-483a-93a3-f0fff0ab6572",
"name": "ReportState",
"namespace": "Alexa",
"payloadVersion": "3"
},
"payload": {}
}
}
This is the response I am sending from lambda function. It is written in python 3.6.
{
"event": {
"context": {
"properties": [
{
"name": "powerState",
"namespace": "Alexa.PowerController",
"timeOfSample": "2018-12-17T18:17:35.00Z",
"uncertaintyInMilliseconds": 500,
"value": "ON"
}
]
},
"endpoint": {
"cookie": {
"detail1": "For simplicity, this is the only appliance",
"detail2": "that has some values in the additionalApplianceDetails"
},
"endpointId": "endpoint-001",
"scope": {
"token": "weza|IwEBIGu_tmpSTQaEPvhm0OYy-4ncjve_Au1788TAWR2DC8b7xJlPDiX3HV3rJUtG0qyauIlman4bX4ZCK0-6NvKWagqXNLSdH3bDBLxD_9VtgCQo6wUlEd4DNmL9Yf5sWuUCkV1ALAxxbhqPs3QlTofubxtpSnF05ZWOSjyNUlM3ShryLh7owTywFa_7oXCCaLdLCTiqOm27aPn-yyJEDNG57Sc9iysrZkJHaxVPbdZdcqRmaw9zFGVWOqsgjqiojkKrfztslVL1Ggo6v7Teg8isrZD8osr5HFkWAmZHi8K7UrHmwQnsD9CosgSxSG0avnUoomdsZx3_LPjLJKf5twJrN1vbLolzOgxUbVuAVPVrs8UN40KFEu6eCv_7rYz9AER_61di-4w1K27kjeJvzPMIKlLXLvv6Z-2GyuQq_8M1fUdM0SgiAkqjf92S9SNxezTUiDYdOjB1JrktbQc0WM6OYYXOMjtXcCPx3bqNwWoPZWBk7qptLTurCHcYnnDl27Q0RcJ3u1vFvMaT8l0x87K6wqW2",
"type": "BearerToken"
}
},
"header": {
"correlationToken": "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",
"messageId": "dd8670d5-3afa-483a-93a3-f0fff0ab6572",
"name": "StateReport",
"namespace": "Alexa",
"payloadVersion": "3"
},
"payload": {}
}
}
Please help me. I am stuck in this for last 2 days.
Not sure if this is related to your problem. In your response, the context element is inside event. But according to the documentation and code sample, context and event should be at the same level.
{
"context": {
"properties": [...]
},
"event": {
"header": ...,
"endpoint": ...,
"payload": {}
}
}
Related
When querying archival node for transactions with EXPERIMENTAL_tx_status method, some transactions have no receipts while having receipts_outcome. How is that possible, and how is that transaction different from others?
If I understand correctly, receipts_outcome are the results of applying receipts. According to explorer, this transaction has Convert Transaction To Receipt part, so there should be some receipts generated.
According to documentation
A Receipt is the only actionable object in the system. When we talk about "processing a transaction" on the NEAR platform, this eventually means "applying receipts" at some point.
A good mental model is to think of a Receipt as a paid message to be executed at the destination (receiver). And a Transaction is an externally issued request to create the Receipt (there is a 1 to 1 relationship).
My query
{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"id": "2",
"method": "EXPERIMENTAL_tx_status",
"params": ["7beNxrbHxMRspJWT9NeEVwx719kVcmY9tRdPG9SYro26", "bumbleee99.near"]
}
Response
{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"result": {
"status": {
"SuccessValue": ""
},
"transaction": {
"signer_id": "bumbleee99.near",
"public_key": "ed25519:DFM5GRGbpNkk4XkhcFnRUFeKG8a3nzTH8NwZp754pC48",
"nonce": 59080995000003,
"receiver_id": "bumbleee99.near",
"actions": [
{
"AddKey": {
"public_key": "ed25519:CUoNs153GHrPZ9F8HpvhzFr1mwuUFUdGQsRNE2CTNjVH",
"access_key": {
"nonce": 0,
"permission": "FullAccess"
}
}
}
],
"signature": "ed25519:15v34qoyCHSvSL5uLcaPqD9vXvjcPrCaZVStCMms8e58C62z2UHiazwUXzHajPEgdHpwn7s4J9dd5UPmtvzbYgM",
"hash": "7beNxrbHxMRspJWT9NeEVwx719kVcmY9tRdPG9SYro26"
},
"transaction_outcome": {
"proof": [
{
"hash": "ECKDm5FVhzit7Wqs9sEyBB9NtuTrVRZmWwcxkkg2yUh4",
"direction": "Right"
},
{
"hash": "E4VXdwsNj3fZCbP6y9YH3M5oZHPDcdArqU9kbZJa95Qp",
"direction": "Right"
}
],
"block_hash": "ASY6HgDUQUXUa99L7dPEfghKEnEk5SNkwQrx24u3Fobz",
"id": "7beNxrbHxMRspJWT9NeEVwx719kVcmY9tRdPG9SYro26",
"outcome": {
"logs": [],
"receipt_ids": [
"JDnBrxh6L9KFgVUEg6U8d39rEUEmbvLQ5tZQUmJTMyFJ"
],
"gas_burnt": 209824625000,
"tokens_burnt": "20982462500000000000",
"executor_id": "bumbleee99.near",
"status": {
"SuccessReceiptId": "JDnBrxh6L9KFgVUEg6U8d39rEUEmbvLQ5tZQUmJTMyFJ"
},
"metadata": {
"version": 1,
"gas_profile": null
}
}
},
"receipts_outcome": [
{
"proof": [
{
"hash": "8RwCWE9HgqenPKv8JW9eg2iSLMaQW82wvebYSfjPbdTY",
"direction": "Left"
},
{
"hash": "E4VXdwsNj3fZCbP6y9YH3M5oZHPDcdArqU9kbZJa95Qp",
"direction": "Right"
}
],
"block_hash": "ASY6HgDUQUXUa99L7dPEfghKEnEk5SNkwQrx24u3Fobz",
"id": "JDnBrxh6L9KFgVUEg6U8d39rEUEmbvLQ5tZQUmJTMyFJ",
"outcome": {
"logs": [],
"receipt_ids": [],
"gas_burnt": 209824625000,
"tokens_burnt": "20982462500000000000",
"executor_id": "bumbleee99.near",
"status": {
"SuccessValue": ""
},
"metadata": {
"version": 1,
"gas_profile": []
}
}
}
],
"receipts": []
},
"id": "2"
}
You could see that both transaction_outcome.outcome.receipt_ids and transaction_outcome.outcome.status are pointing to a receipt with ID JDnBrxh6L9KFgVUEg6U8d39rEUEmbvLQ5tZQUmJTMyFJ. I've tried querying node about this receipt with EXPERIMENTAL_receipt method like this
{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"id": "2",
"method": "EXPERIMENTAL_receipt",
"params": {"receipt_id": "JDnBrxh6L9KFgVUEg6U8d39rEUEmbvLQ5tZQUmJTMyFJ"}
}
yet the node returns error indicating, that there is no receipt with given ID
{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"error": {
"name": "HANDLER_ERROR",
"cause": {
"name": "UNKNOWN_RECEIPT",
"info": {
"receipt_id": "JDnBrxh6L9KFgVUEg6U8d39rEUEmbvLQ5tZQUmJTMyFJ"
}
},
"code": -32000,
"message": "Server error",
"data": {
"name": "UNKNOWN_RECEIPT",
"info": {
"receipt_id": "JDnBrxh6L9KFgVUEg6U8d39rEUEmbvLQ5tZQUmJTMyFJ"
}
}
},
"id": "2"
}
TL;DR the receipt is a local receipt
The transaction from your example is a simple AddKey action where the sender is the receiver (remember this, it's important)
"Execute" transaction (means to convert the transaction into a Receipt)
Apply the Receipts
As the result of the conversion of the transaction into a receipt is your transaction_outcome
"outcome": {
"receipt_ids": [
"JDnBrxh6L9KFgVUEg6U8d39rEUEmbvLQ5tZQUmJTMyFJ"
],
"status": {
"SuccessReceiptId": "JDnBrxh6L9KFgVUEg6U8d39rEUEmbvLQ5tZQUmJTMyFJ"
},
This receipt is about to be applied and the predecessor_id and the receiver_id are equal. In nearcore such receipts are called local receipts (sir - sender-is-receiver) and those receipts are not stored in the nearcore database.
We emulate them on NEAR Indexer Framework side (that's why you can see Receipt JDnBrxh6L9KFgVUEg6U8d39rEUEmbvLQ5tZQUmJTMyFJ on the transaction details page on NEAR Explorer)
And because nearcore doesn't store such receipts in the database you got UNKNOWN_RECEIPT from the RPC.
I am currently building an application for which it is important to check the existence of resources with a certain profile.
As we need to check this for 40+ profiles I'd like to put this all in 1 batch request and let our HAPI-FHIR server implementation handle this, as opposed to querying them one by one. This would get too chatty otherwise.
Because I only need to know about whether the resource exists I'd like to use _summary=count. I am assuming this increases the performance of the request.
Example request
{
"resourceType": "Bundle",
"type": "batch",
"entry": [
{
"request": {
"method": "GET",
"url": "/Observation?_profile=http://nictiz.nl/fhir/StructureDefinition/zib-DrugUse&_summary=true"
}
},
{
"request": {
"method": "GET",
"url": "/RelatedPerson?_profile=http://fhir.nl/fhir/StructureDefinition/nl-core-relatedperson&_summary=count"
}
}
]
}
Response
{
"resourceType": "Bundle",
"id": "fd66cfd9-4693-496d-86fc-98289067480b",
"type": "batch-response",
"link": [
{
"relation": "self",
"url": "<redacted>"
}
],
"entry": [
{
"resource": {
"resourceType": "Bundle",
"id": "2647a49f-0503-496b-b274-07d4e9163f1b",
"meta": {
"lastUpdated": "2021-02-15T11:44:18.035+00:00",
"tag": [
{
"system": "http://hl7.org/fhir/v3/ObservationValue",
"code": "SUBSETTED",
"display": "Resource encoded in summary mode"
}
]
},
"type": "searchset",
"total": 48
},
"response": {
"status": "200 OK"
}
},
{
"resource": {
"resourceType": "Bundle",
"id": "2f9cc861-5d20-4da1-aa9f-12153b75539d",
"meta": {
"lastUpdated": "2021-02-15T11:44:18.151+00:00",
"tag": [
{
"system": "http://hl7.org/fhir/v3/ObservationValue",
"code": "SUBSETTED",
"display": "Resource encoded in summary mode"
}
]
},
"type": "searchset",
"total": 10
},
"response": {
"status": "200 OK"
}
}
]
}
Can I assume that the ordering of the batch-response is the same as that of the batch-request?
Or is there a method to annotate the batch entries which are persisted onto the batch-response?
Or finally, is there a flag I can turn on to make the response include the request.url part?
I'm using HAPI-FHIR 5.1.0 both for client and server.
Apparently I didn't look well enough in the specs, as I just found the following:
From the FHIR spec
For a batch, or a successful transaction, the response the server SHALL return a Bundle with type set to batch-response or transaction-response that contains one entry for each entry in the request, in the same order, with the outcome of processing the entry.
I have a live Microsoft Teams application with a couple of working functionalities. Right now I am working on a new feature where the user clicks on a button in a previously sent adaptive card and I will open another adaptive card with a form for the user to fill. I am using this documentation as a base, which has a really similar example as to what I am trying to achieve here.
Since I am working with an adaptive card the button that will open my form card is an Action.Submit button with "msteams": {"type': 'task/fetch"} inside its data. When I click that button I receive the correct invoke call, the body looks like this:
{
"type": "invoke",
"timestamp": "2021-02-01T20:19:34.327Z",
"localTimestamp": "2021-02-01T15:19:34.327-05:00",
"id": "f:955407977095344101",
"channelId": "msteams",
"serviceUrl": "https://smba.trafficmanager.net/amer/",
"from": {
"id": "censured",
"name": "censured",
"aadObjectId": "censured"
},
"conversation": {
"conversationType": "personal",
"tenantId": "censured",
"id": "censured"
},
"recipient": {
"id": "censured",
"name": "Tcensured"
},
"entities": [
{
"locale": "censured",
"country": "censured",
"platform": "censured",
"timezone": "censured",
"type": "clientInfo"
}
],
"channelData": {
"tenant": {
"id": "censured"
},
"source": {
"name": "message"
},
"legacy": {
"replyToId": "censured"
}
},
"replyToId": "censured",
"value": {
"commandId": "reply_feedback",
"requested_feedback_id": 1,
"type": "composeExtension/fetchTask"
},
"locale": "censured",
"localTimezone": "censured"
}
It seems like the invoke call is correct, so the next step is to answer the call with my adaptive card. However, it doesn't matter what I answer this call with, when I inspect the invoke call in my browser the answer is always empty, even if I answer with a really simple task response like (which I got from the documentation)
{
"task": {
"type": "continue",
"value": {
"title": "Task module title",
"height": 500,
"width": "medium",
"url": "https://contoso.com/msteams/taskmodules/newcustomer",
"fallbackUrl": "https://contoso.com/msteams/taskmodules/newcustomer"
}
}
}
Or even
{
"task": {
"type": "message",
"value": "Test"
}
}
I still get an empty response on the front-end side. I am fairly confident that I am properly answering the call on my side with data, I have a lot of other features in this same application working so I don't think it is some problem where I am actually giving an empty body from my side. Maybe for the specific invoke call I need to answer things in a different manner?
Obs: I am using Python with no SDKs, so I build Adaptive Cards and interpret the requests on my application.
I am implementing my Alexa Home Skill using AWS Lambda.
Given the following request I receive when I try to detect new devices on Alexa Skil test page:
{directive={header={namespace=Alexa.Discovery, name=Discover, payloadVersion=3, messageId=0160c7e7-031f-47ee-a1d9-a23f38f87a9e}, payload={scope={type=BearerToken, token=...}}}}
I respond with the following:
{
"event": {
"payload": {
"endpoints": [
{
"displayCategories": [
"SMARTPLUG"
],
"capabilities": [
{
"type": "AlexaInterface",
"interface": "Alexa",
"version": "3"
},
{
"type": "AlexaInterface",
"interface": "Alexa.PowerController",
"version": "3",
"properties": {
"retrievable": true,
"supported": [
{
"name": "powerState"
}
],
"proactivelyReported": true
}
},
{
"type": "AlexaInterface",
"interface": "Alexa.EndpointHealth",
"version": "3",
"properties": {
"retrievable": true,
"supported": [
{
"name": "connectivity"
}
],
"proactivelyReported": true
}
}
],
"manufacturerName": "mirko.io",
"endpointId": "ca84ef6d-53b1-430a-8a5e-a62f174eac5e",
"description": "mirko.io forno (id: ca84ef6d-53b1-430a-8a5e-a62f174eac5e)",
"friendlyName": "forno"
}
]
},
"header": {
"payloadVersion": "3",
"namespace": "Alexa.Discovery",
"name": "Discover.Response",
"messageId": "c0555cc8-ad7a-4377-b310-9de9b9ab6282"
}
}
}
Despite that, for some reasons Alexa answers that it did not find any new device.
I may be mistaken but I am pretty sure it used to work before I decided to add the Alexa.EndpointHealth interface.
Your response object looks right to me, except the extra "endpoint" field.
"endpoint": {
"endpointId": "INVALID",
"scope": {
"type": "BearerToken",
"token": "INVALID"
}
}
There's no such field in the Alexa.Discovery documentation. Try removing it and see if it resolves the issue.
I have an AWS lambda with multiple triggers. When the lambda is invoked, I'd like to be able to determine which trigger invoked the lambda within the lambda code itself. Is this information available somehow? I tried looking at the event object and the context object, but I did not see that information available. Is there some api I can call to get the trigger or another way to get that information reliably?
Answering late but may help someone else looking for solution-
As #Leon mentioned, eventSource would work. For example, below are two different payload for s3 and sqs-
{
"Records": [
{
"eventVersion": "2.1",
"eventSource": "aws:s3",
"awsRegion": "us-east-2",
"eventTime": "2019-09-03T19:37:27.192Z",
"eventName": "ObjectCreated:Put",
"userIdentity": {
"principalId": "AWS:AIDAINPONIXQXHT3IKHL2"
},
"requestParameters": {
"sourceIPAddress": "205.255.255.255"
},
"responseElements": {
"x-amz-request-id": "D82B88E5F771F645",
"x-amz-id-2": "vlR7PnpV2Ce81l0PRw6jlUpck7Jo5ZsQjryTjKlc5aLWGVHPZLj5NeC6qMa0emYBDXOo6QBU0Wo="
},
"s3": {
"s3SchemaVersion": "1.0",
"configurationId": "828aa6fc-f7b5-4305-8584-487c791949c1",
"bucket": {
"name": "DOC-EXAMPLE-BUCKET",
"ownerIdentity": {
"principalId": "A3I5XTEXAMAI3E"
},
"arn": "arn:aws:s3:::lambda-artifacts-deafc19498e3f2df"
},
"object": {
"key": "b21b84d653bb07b05b1e6b33684dc11b",
"size": 1305107,
"eTag": "b21b84d653bb07b05b1e6b33684dc11b",
"sequencer": "0C0F6F405D6ED209E1"
}
}
}
]
}
SQS-
{
"Records": [
{
"messageId": "11d6ee51-4cc7-4302-9e22-7cd8afdaadf5",
"receiptHandle": "AQEBBX8nesZEXmkhsmZeyIE8iQAMig7qw...",
"body": "Test message.",
"attributes": {
"ApproximateReceiveCount": "1",
"SentTimestamp": "1573251510774",
"SequenceNumber": "18849496460467696128",
"MessageGroupId": "1",
"SenderId": "AIDAIO23YVJENQZJOL4VO",
"MessageDeduplicationId": "1",
"ApproximateFirstReceiveTimestamp": "1573251510774"
},
"messageAttributes": {},
"md5OfBody": "e4e68fb7bd0e697a0ae8f1bb342846b3",
"eventSource": "aws:sqs",
"eventSourceARN": "arn:aws:sqs:us-east-2:123456789012:fifo.fifo",
"awsRegion": "us-east-2"
}
]
}
Now you can use -
source = event['Records'][0]['eventSource']
This should give the resource name, in case of s3 you would get aws:s3, and for sqs- aws:sqs.