docs: Algorand x402 Specification Proposal

[ehanoc]

Description

Submitting proposal for Algorand's x402 support.

The proposal takes advantages of Algorand's Native Atomic Transaction Groups, Instant finality and the ability to fee pooling to comply with the requirements of x402 protocol.

Future

Upon review and if accepted, we are committed to submit the actual implementation

• Algorand Foundation

[cb-heimdall]

🟡 Heimdall Review Status

Requirement	Status	More Info
Reviews	🟡 0/1	Denominator calculation Show calculation 1 if user is bot 0 1 if user is external 0 2 if repo is sensitive 0 From .codeflow.yml 1 Additional review requirements Show calculation Max 0 0 From CODEOWNERS 0 Global minimum 0 Max 1 1 1 if commit is unverified 0 Sum 1

[vercel]

@ehanoc is attempting to deploy a commit to the Coinbase Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[CarsonRoscoe]

Hey all,

With #705 nearly complete, we encourage you to rebase off of the development-v2 branch. Adding new protocol families such as Algorand will be much easier in the new version, and that branch will become the new main shortly

[ehanoc]

Hey all,

With #705 nearly complete, we encourage you to rebase off of the development-v2 branch. Adding new protocol families such as Algorand will be much easier in the new version, and that branch will become the new main shortly

Hey @CarsonRoscoe , thanks for getting back to us.

I had a look at that branch and it seems to be touching mostly implementations, we are only submitting the specification here as suggested by the CONTRIBUTING.md guide. We recommend first proposing a scheme by opening a PR with a proposed spec into specs/, discussing the architecture and purpose in that PR, then once the PR is merged, moving on to implementation. . It's a single file atm.

We are ready to submit an implementation if we can get a review on this and approval first. Would that be possible?

[edcalderon]

LGTM

[ehanoc]

Hey @CarsonRoscoe , any chance we could have someone have a look at this?

[CarsonRoscoe]

Approach seems logical. Most feedback is about upgrading this to target version 2

[CarsonRoscoe]

After reviewing, virtually all my requested changes are just about targetting v2 over v1.

The meat of the proposal is logical and I am content with, once the v2 updates are in we'll be good to merge

[ehanoc]

After reviewing, virtually all my requested changes are just about targetting v2 over v1.

The meat of the proposal is logical and I am content with, once the v2 updates are in we'll be good to merge

Thanks so much for reviewing @CarsonRoscoe . I've just made the updates, rebased and pushed.

Let me know if there's anything else!