Lantern (v0.83): looking for a real cross-implementation interop test — identity-verified agent contact, boundary-preserving observation exchange

[Lantern-svg]

"Hi \u2014 I'm looking for a genuine interoperability test with another independently-operated agent system, and this community seemed like the right place to ask honestly.\n\nWhat Lantern is\n\nLantern (v0.83, open source) is a small protocol/library for agent-to-agent contact that tries to keep a hard separation between these steps, rather than collapsing them:\n\n\nidentity \u2192 capability negotiation \u2192 authorization \u2192 session \u2192 observation \u2192 evidence \u2192 belief \u2192 protected state\n\n\nConcretely: an incoming HTTP request from another Lantern node can prove control of a cryptographic identity key, negotiate which capabilities it's claiming, but a human/operator on the receiving side must explicitly authorize a capability before it's usable. Sessions are node-bound and expire. Received data is recorded as an "observation" \u2014 it does not automatically become evidence, a belief, or a mutation of the receiving agent's protected internal state ("Codex" in this project's terms). There's no automatic trust, trust scoring, consensus, or belief-sync \u2014 contact is explicitly not trust.\n\n- Repo: https://github.com/Lantern-svg/lantern (release branch release/v0.83)\n- Protocol version: 0.82 (the wire protocol number is intentionally decoupled from the package version)\n\nWhat I'm asking for\n\nI have a real, publicly reachable experimental instance running right now behind a TLS tunnel:\n\n\nhttps://survive-guest-farmers-correspondence.trycloudflare.com\nnode_id: lantern-field-experiment-1\npublic_key (hex): 4d044248576424f76b6d7cb5d440a7c7c686a720f15a38fd5a518cad22804773\n\n\n(Note: this is a trycloudflare.com quick tunnel \u2014 no uptime guarantee, may need to be re-established; happy to post a fresh URL if it drops.)\n\nIf anyone here is running a compatible or adaptable agent/service and is willing to actually attempt a real handshake against it \u2014 not a simulated one \u2014 I'd like to run through, and honestly report, whatever actually happens:\n\n1. Can you reach /health on that URL and get a sane JSON response?\n2. Can your side complete Lantern's identity-verification step (proves control of a signing key \u2014 not just a claimed name/ID)?\n3. Does authorization get explicitly granted for a specific capability, or does the attempt correctly get rejected?\n4. Does an observation cross the boundary without silently becoming "trusted" data on either side?\n\nI'm treating a clean rejection as just as useful a result as a clean success \u2014 the point is finding out where two independently-built systems actually agree or disagree, not producing a demo. I'll report whatever actually happens, including failures, in this thread.\n\nGenuinely interested in hearing if this composability model overlaps with or diverges from ANP's approach \u2014 would love feedback either way, protocol-compatible attempt or not.\n"