Skip to main content
Independent MeasurementEndpoint record (L0 · L1)Published state: passLast probed: 2026-09-28 · 1 day ago

onchainrouter.dev/v1/messages

1.Catalog declaration

Catalog declaration for this endpoint
Resource URLhttps://onchainrouter.dev/v1/messages
Sourcecdp_bazaar
Declared methodPOST
Networkeip155:8453
Receiving address0xa7660dea6aadcc87cbb5e79ccd262d391e61de5d
Declared price (base units)2000
Catalog statusactive
First seen / last seen2026-09-05 01:03 UTC / 2026-09-29 01:03 UTC
Catalog-reported calls / payers (30d)6 / 1

2.Probe history

2026-09-082026-09-28
Figure 1. Probe timeline, last 30 probes for this endpoint (UTC). Filled = pass, crossed = fail, dashed = unverified. Same-day probes overlap. Marks closer than one mark width are stepped down one lane.
L0 probe history, newest first
Probed atMethodVerdictHTTPLatencyReason
2026-09-28 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402527 ms—
2026-09-27 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402554 ms—
2026-09-27 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402642 ms—
2026-09-26 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402431 ms—
2026-09-25 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402543 ms—
2026-09-25 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402505 ms—
2026-09-24 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402501 ms—
2026-09-23 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402402 ms—
2026-09-22 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402373 ms—
2026-09-22 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402357 ms—
2026-09-21 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402349 ms—
2026-09-20 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402328 ms—
2026-09-19 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402587 ms—
2026-09-19 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402388 ms—
2026-09-18 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402494 ms—
2026-09-17 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402405 ms—
2026-09-17 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402353 ms—
2026-09-16 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402433 ms—
2026-09-15 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402319 ms—
2026-09-14 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402457 ms—
2026-09-14 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402503 ms—
2026-09-13 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402363 ms—
2026-09-13 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402352 ms—
2026-09-12 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402330 ms—
2026-09-11 22:40 UTCPOSTpass4021581 ms—
2026-09-11 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402712 ms—
2026-09-10 17:40 UTCPOSTpass402381 ms—
2026-09-10 05:40 UTCPOSTpass402478 ms—
2026-09-09 17:40 UTCPOSTpass402461 ms—
2026-09-08 23:40 UTCPOSTpass402361 ms—

3.L1 — real purchases

0 of 2 paid attempts settled with a receipt, and 0 of those also returned a 2xx response (delivered). Each settled row carries its on-chain transaction hash — the receipt is the evidence. A settled row reads as nonce-bound when the on-chain re-read also matched the one-time signature nonce we generated for that purchase, and amount + payee when it matched amount, payee, asset and chain with no nonce on record — the binding shipped on 2026-09-04, so earlier rows carry the weaker evidence and keep their label rather than being demoted (methodology). settled is the transfer we confirmed on-chain; delivered is the response arriving. A settled row whose paid request answered 5xx counts as settled and not as delivered — definitions.

2 of those paid attempts are held as inconclusive rather than counted against this seller (0 settled and answered 4xx, 2 answered 4xx with no settlement receipt, 0 answered 402 or 5xx while our own payer wallet was out of USDC, 2026-09-13 00:00 to 2026-09-15 23:49 UTC). A 4xx says the request was not one the server would accept, and we cannot rule out that the request was ours to get wrong: vet402 buys with no API key of the seller's, and sends a POST body only when the seller declares one. This is the same principle the methodology already applied to path_template URLs, applied to the body and the authentication header as well. The rows are not deleted and not hidden — they are below, with their status and HTTP code, and they are out of the denominator for delivered (corrections).

1 of the paid attempts failed on vet402's side (for example our wallet was out of USDC, or we did not send the input the listing declares). The rows stay in the table.

Terms in this table

settle_failed
vet402 signed a payment and got no settlement receipt back.
unsettled_4xx
held_reason in the export: the paid request got a 4xx with no settlement receipt and no transaction.
L2 not_checked
not checked: the paid request did not answer 200, so there was no response to check against the listing's output schema.
Whose side
the same words as the seller page: seller's side only after failures on two different days (UTC), marked “under re-check”; vet402's side; or not sorted (the rules).
0/2
Figure 2. Settle-through: one cell per paid attempt. Filled = settled with an on-chain receipt, crossed = paid but no receipt.
L1 purchase history, newest first
Attempted atResultHTTPReceipt (tx)Latency
09-28 12:01settle_failed400—899 ms
2000 units (≈ $0.002 USDC) · L2 not_checkedWhose side: not sorted: no charge
09-06 12:09settle_failed400—533 ms
2000 units (≈ $0.002 USDC) · L2 not_checkedWhose side: vet402's side

Get one email when this record's verdict changes. No digest, no marketing — one message per change, and only for this endpoint. We first send one confirmation email; nothing else goes out until you confirm.

4.Catalog listing events

No listing changes observed.

unverified is not a failure; a fail is published only after two consecutive failing probes. Definitions: methodology.

5.Dispute this record

Think a measurement above is wrong? Say which probe or purchase and what you observed instead. One person reads it and replies. The record is never deleted on dispute: if it was wrong, the correction is published with the same weight; if it was right, it stands. Operators who control the receiving address can also sign a dispute via POST /api/v1/observatory/disputes (API reference), which re-measures through the normal publication gate.

About the purchase at 2026-09-28T12:01:34Z (UTC). The form starts with that time; add what you saw instead.

20–2,000 characters · 59 so far