LG-15440 We couldnt find records matching your address screen

[theabrad]

🎫 Ticket

Link to the relevant ticket:
LG-15440

🛠 Summary of changes

Whenever a user fails InstantVerify, because address can't be verified we want to show them a screen to try to enter their address again.

We still have to wait until the mock proofer is up to test this on the idp.

📜 Testing Plan

Provide a checklist of steps to confirm the changes.

• Make sure specs pass
• visit /verify/session/errors/address_warning and confirm changes are made.

👀 Screenshots

[amirbey]

Suggested change

	def address_warning
	rate_limiter = RateLimiter.new(
	user: idv_session_user,
	rate_limit_type: :idv_resolution,
	)
	@step_indicator_steps = step_indicator_steps
	@address_path = idv_address_url
	@remaining_submit_attempts = rate_limiter.remaining_count
	log_event(based_on_limiter: rate_limiter)
	end
	def address_warning
	@step_indicator_steps = step_indicator_steps
	@address_path = idv_address_url
	@remaining_submit_attempts = resolution_rate_limiter.remaining_count
	log_event(based_on_limiter: resolution_rate_limiter)
	end
	# private
	def resolution_rate_limter
	@resolution_rate_limter ||= RateLimiter.new(
	user: idv_session_user,
	rate_limit_type: :idv_resolution,
	)
	end

seems like a refactor opportunity since this rate limiter is being instantiated in 3 places... and then can update failure and warning actions 🤔

[amirbey]

thanks for refactoring. While perhaps choosing a different route then the code suggestion, I'm concerned that the path chosen could be more confusing from a readability standpoint because other methods in this controller also using rate_limiter for varying rate_limiter_types. As suggested, I think it would be helpful to rename to distinguish the type of rate limiter being used here ... As opposed to the refactor path chosen, I'd prefer revert to your original implementation when we replicated the same code 3 times ... it's more readable 🙏🏿

[amirbey]

what is the intention for this change? it appears that same_address_as_id is defined when updating an address during IPP 🤔

[amirbey]

btw, I created an issue to refactor our usage of same_address_as_id

[anniehirshman-gsa]

Screenshot LGTM!

For code review and testing -- the main logic to test is that this error appears if the only failures are due to address checks. If other name, DOB, or SSN failures occur then a user would see the original error content. Thanks!

[amirbey]

Suggested change

	def set_resolution_rate_limiter
	@resolution_rate_limiter = RateLimiter.new(
	def resolution_rate_limiter
	@resolution_rate_limiter ||= RateLimiter.new(

[amirbey]

Suggested change

before_action :set_resolution_rate_limiter, only: [:warning, :address_warning, :failure]

i think it's simpler to just call the rate limiter when needed ... is there a benefit to using the filter here?

[amirbey]

Suggested change

attr_reader :resolution_rate_limiter

[amirbey]

do we know that address is the sole error?