Fix remaining critical, high, and medium issues from 4-perspective review

Critical fixes:
- Fix rating clamp range 1-10 → 1-5 (actual scale)
- Add `ietf ideas convergence` command (SequenceMatcher at 0.75 threshold)
- Fix "628 cross-org ideas" → 130 (verified from current DB) across 8 files

Security fixes:
- Sanitize FTS5 query input (strip special chars + boolean operators)
- Add rate limiting (10 req/min/IP) on Claude-calling endpoints
- Change <path:name> → <string:name> on draft routes

Codebase fixes:
- Add Database context manager (__enter__/__exit__)
- Wire false_positive filtering into queries (exclude by default in web UI)
- Fix Post 3 arithmetic ("~300" → "~409" distinct proposals)

Content & licensing:
- Add MIT LICENSE file
- Add IPR/FRAND notes (BCP 79, RFC 8179) to Posts 03 and 07
- Qualify "4:1 safety ratio" with monthly variation in 6 remaining files
- Add "Data as of March 2026" freeze-date headers to all 10 blog posts
- Hedge causal language in Post 04

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

data/reports/blog-series/state-of-ecosystem.md

@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
 # State of the IETF AI Agent Ecosystem: Where We Are and Where We're Going
 
-*A vision document synthesizing 434 drafts, 557 authors, 628 cross-org convergent ideas, and 11 gaps into a picture of the AI agent standards landscape in 2026 and its trajectory through 2028.*
+*A vision document synthesizing 434 drafts, 557 authors, 130 cross-org convergent ideas, and 11 gaps into a picture of the AI agent standards landscape in 2026 and its trajectory through 2028.*
+
+*Analysis based on IETF Datatracker data collected through March 2026. Counts and statistics reflect this snapshot.*
 
 ---
 
@@ -8,7 +10,7 @@
 
 The IETF's AI agent standardization landscape in March 2026 resembles a city under construction: cranes everywhere, foundations going in, multiple development teams building in parallel -- but no master plan, no zoning, and the safety inspectors have not been hired yet.
 
-The numbers tell the story. In nine months, from June 2025 to February 2026, the rate of AI/agent-related Internet-Draft submissions grew rapidly. By February 2026, submissions reached 85 per month, up from single digits in mid-2025. The corpus now contains **434 drafts** from **557 authors** representing **230 organizations**. Our cross-organization analysis found **628 technical ideas** independently proposed by multiple organizations -- genuine consensus signals amid the noise -- and identified **11 standardization gaps**, three of them critical.
+The numbers tell the story. In nine months, from June 2025 to February 2026, the rate of AI/agent-related Internet-Draft submissions grew rapidly. By February 2026, submissions reached 85 per month, up from single digits in mid-2025. The corpus now contains **434 drafts** from **557 authors** representing **230 organizations**. Our cross-organization analysis found **130 technical ideas** independently proposed by multiple organizations -- genuine consensus signals amid the noise -- and identified **11 standardization gaps**, three of them critical.
 
 This is not incremental growth. This is a phase transition, comparable to the IoT draft surge of 2014-2016 or the early web standards push of the mid-1990s. The IETF is being asked to standardize the infrastructure for a new class of internet participant: the autonomous software agent.
 
@@ -64,7 +66,7 @@ The IETF establishes one or more focused working groups specifically for AI agen
 
 **Conditions required**: A champion organization (or coalition) willing to do the coordination work. A BoF or side meeting at an upcoming IETF meeting that gains enough momentum to charter a WG. Active participation from implementers (cloud providers, agent framework builders) who can provide deployment reality checks.
 
-**Probability**: Moderate. The raw material exists -- 628 cross-org convergent ideas show that organizations already agree on the building blocks. What is needed is organizational will to connect them.
+**Probability**: Moderate. The raw material exists -- 130 cross-org convergent ideas show that organizations already agree on the building blocks. What is needed is organizational will to connect them.
 
 ### Scenario C: Architecture-First Design
 
@@ -112,16 +114,16 @@ In the first equilibrium, the landscape looks like today's microservices ecosyst
 
 In the second equilibrium, the landscape looks more like the web: a layered architecture where identity (like TLS), communication (like HTTP), and semantics (like HTML) are cleanly separated, with standardized interfaces between them. Agents identify via WIMSE, execute via ECT-based DAGs, communicate via protocol-agnostic bindings, and operate under assurance profiles that scale from development to regulated production. Safety is built in, not bolted on.
 
-The data we have analyzed -- 434 drafts, 628 cross-org convergent ideas, 11 gaps, 18 team blocs -- contains the building blocks for the second equilibrium. The question is whether the IETF community organizes itself to assemble them before market reality imposes the first.
+The data we have analyzed -- 434 drafts, 130 cross-org convergent ideas, 11 gaps, 18 team blocs -- contains the building blocks for the second equilibrium. The question is whether the IETF community organizes itself to assemble them before market reality imposes the first.
 
 The history of internet standards suggests that both happen: a messy market reality emerges first, followed by standards that rationalize and improve it. The web started with browser wars and incompatible HTML, then converged on HTML5. Mobile started with a zoo of protocols, then converged on LTE/5G. The AI agent ecosystem may follow the same path.
 
 But the gap between "messy first deployment" and "rationalized standards" matters enormously for safety. When the thing being standardized is autonomous software that makes decisions, executes actions, and interacts with humans and infrastructure, getting the safety architecture wrong during the messy phase has consequences that are harder to fix retroactively.
 
-The 4:1 ratio is the number to watch. If it narrows -- if safety and oversight work accelerates to match capability work -- the second equilibrium becomes achievable. If it stays at 4:1 or widens, the first equilibrium is where we land, and the safety work becomes remediation rather than prevention.
+The ~4:1 aggregate ratio (averaging ~4:1 but varying from 1.5:1 to 21:1 month-to-month) is the number to watch. If it narrows -- if safety and oversight work accelerates to match capability work -- the second equilibrium becomes achievable. If it stays at ~4:1 or widens, the first equilibrium is where we land, and the safety work becomes remediation rather than prevention.
 
 The drafts are being written. The race is on. The outcome depends on whether coordination catches up to creativity.
 
 ---
 
-*Analysis based on 434 IETF Internet-Drafts, 557 authors, 628 cross-org convergent ideas, and 11 identified gaps, current as of March 2026. Written by the Architect agent as input for the blog series and as a standalone reference document.*
+*Analysis based on 434 IETF Internet-Drafts, 557 authors, 130 cross-org convergent ideas, and 11 identified gaps, current as of March 2026. Written by the Architect agent as input for the blog series and as a standalone reference document.*