```json
{
  "s": "STAMP proposes a cryptographic delegation and proof framework for multi-agent AI systems, binding access tokens to specific tasks and agent identities while interoperating with OAuth 2.0 and GNAP. The protocol aims to enforce least-privilege and zero-trust principles in agentic environments with dynamic, non-deterministic workflows.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Task-bound tokens and message-level proofs for agents represent a useful adaptation of existing delegation concepts, but the core innovation (extending OAuth/GNAP patterns to agent scenarios) is incremental rather than fundamentally novel.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "At 9 pages with abstract-level depth, the draft appears to be an early sketch lacking detailed protocol specifications, cryptographic binding details, concrete examples, or test vectors necessary for implementation.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing work in OAuth 2.0 delegation, GNAP authorization, proof-of-possession mechanisms, and multi-agent security frameworks; the contribution is primarily reframing rather than introducing new primitives.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision dated 2025-11-03 with no visible WG adoption, community discussion, or implementation evidence; appears to be an initial submission without tracked momentum.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to agent identity/authentication and agent-to-agent communication security, with clear applications to autonomous multi-agent systems; somewhat less central to other AI/ML concerns like model serving or safety alignment.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Cosmos proposes a decentralized badge-based identity and communication protocol using cryptographic credentials, trust scoring, and post-quantum encryption without requiring blockchain infrastructure. The protocol integrates semantic messaging, encrypted containers, and a trust-native transport layer designed for deployments prioritizing direct trust relationships.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Combines established concepts (cryptographic credentials, reputation systems, post-quantum crypto) into an integrated stack; lacks fundamental cryptographic or protocol innovations; trust scoring and badge systems are incremental variations on existing credential and capability frameworks.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Abstract references 8 major subsystems but document appears truncated (cuts off mid-sentence in Profile System section); specifications lack concrete algorithm details, cryptographic parameters, example message formats, or test vectors; insufficient maturity for implementation.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing work: badge/capability systems (SPKI/SDSI), trust scoring (web-of-trust models), post-quantum crypto (NIST standardization efforts), encrypted containers (capsule patterns), semantic messaging (Intent-based protocols); primarily a systems composition rather than novel primitives.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft from 2026-01-02 with no revision history evident; no WG affiliation, implementation references, or adoption signals; appears as isolated submission without community momentum or follow-up activity.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI agents: agent identity/authentication mechanisms are directly applicable; trust scoring and decentralized communication could support agent coordination; however, no explicit connection to AI agents, autonomous systems, or agent-specific use cases articulated.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes extending SCEP and EST certificate enrollment protocols with attestation mechanisms for AI agent identity, offering two models: Zero-Knowledge Proofs for continuous private attestation and bootstrapped host endorsement for scalability.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension combining existing protocols (SCEP/EST) with known techniques (ZKP, attestation); the core idea of attestation-enhanced enrollment is not novel, though the specific two-model approach for agents adds some structure.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch with abstract concepts; lacks protocol details, message flows, concrete examples, security proofs, or implementation guidance; ZKP and bootstrapping models described conceptually but not formally specified.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing work on remote attestation (RATS), certificate enrollment extensions (EST-CoAP, TEEP), and ZKP-based authentication; the agent-specific framing is relatively new but mechanisms are well-established.",
  "m": 1,
  "mon": "No evidence of community adoption, WG engagement, or revision history; appears to be a single submission without prior iterations or demonstrated interest from IETF community.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to agent identity and authentication; addresses real scalability challenges in agentic AI systems; however, the connection to broader AI safety, alignment, or governance is underdeveloped.",
  "c": ["Agent identity/auth", "A2A protocols", "Autonomous netops", "Policy/governance"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "DA-ITN proposes a multi-plane reference framework connecting AI clients, data providers, model providers, and computational resources to support training, inference, and agentic interactions. The architecture emphasizes control, data, and OAM planes for reliability and accountability but is explicitly positioned as a reference model rather than standardization target.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution; combines existing concepts (multi-plane networking, federated AI infrastructure) without novel architectural primitives or mechanisms. The framing as 'data and agent aware' adds modest specificity to established network abstraction patterns.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "Problem statement and conceptual framework only; lacks protocol specifications, formal definitions, data models, interaction sequences, or implementation guidance. States 'various protocols shall be defined' but none are presented.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant conceptual overlap with federated learning infrastructure, distributed ML platforms (Ray, Kubeflow), and existing multi-plane network frameworks (3GPP, OpenFlow). The agent awareness and lifecycle management add minor differentiation but remain incremental extensions of established paradigms.",
  "m": 1,
  "mon": "Single dated submission (2026-04-29) with no evidence of iterative development, community discussion, or WG traction. Appears to be initial proposal without revision history or adoption signals.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant; addresses infrastructure for AI systems and agent interactions but lacks depth on agent autonomy, decision-making, safety, or capability negotiation. Primarily a network/resource management concern rather than AI/agent core topics. Governance and trust elements are mentioned but underdeveloped.",
  "c": [
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Model serving/inference",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes integrating hybrid post-quantum cryptography (PQC) into EAP-AKA' Forward Secrecy to protect against quantum computing threats to ephemeral key exchange. It extends RFC9678 by replacing traditional ECDHE with PQ/T hybrid algorithms to achieve quantum-resistant perfect forward secrecy in cellular authentication.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Straightforward application of existing hybrid PQC terminology to a known protocol; incremental security enhancement rather than fundamental innovation.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defines protocol modifications and mechanism integration but appears to lack implementation details, test vectors, and validation examples needed for deployment readiness.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with hybrid PQC standardization efforts (NIST, ISO) and existing EAP-AKA' extensions; primarily combines established components rather than introducing novel integration patterns.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft revision dated 2026-02-26 with limited evidence of WG adoption or community discussion; typical IETF progression but no clear momentum indicators.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents or autonomous systems; addresses cellular network authentication security, which is infrastructure-layer rather than agent-focused.",
  "c": ["Other AI/agent"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes an IANA registry mechanism for Model Context Protocol tool surface names to enable standardized wire-level identifiers for typed capabilities on MCP servers. Uses Specification Required registration with Designated Expert review, with initial entries from prior related work.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental administrative infrastructure work—establishes a straightforward registry for identifiers in an emerging protocol, lacking novel technical approaches or conceptual contributions.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Well-defined registry mechanism following RFC 8126 standards with clear registration procedures, but narrow scope limited to one administrative function without implementation details or operational guidance.",
  "o": 2,
  "on": "Minor similarities to other IANA registry proposals; the approach is standard registry design with no significant overlap with existing specifications.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision draft addressing a foundational need for related work ([ORGALTER]); limited evidence of broader community adoption or working group momentum beyond the Morrison-family drafts.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent infrastructure—MCP is a core protocol for agent-server interaction, and standardized tool naming is essential for interoperability in agent frameworks.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Data formats/interop"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes APS Profile, a vendor-neutral storage service class for managing durable persistent state in autonomous agents, addressing compliance, cryptographic erasure, and high-frequency I/O patterns. Bridges the gap between agent frameworks treating storage as generic filesystems and storage administrators managing stateless VMs by introducing standardized Usage Classes and Kubernetes/CSI integration.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental work applying existing storage abstraction patterns (CSI, Redfish/Swordfish) to agent-specific workloads; compliance/erasure requirements are domain-familiar but not novel in isolation.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase—defines conceptual Usage Class and schema guidance but lacks concrete protocol mechanics, serialization formats, API signatures, or implementation reference; experimental status indicates pre-spec maturity.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing storage profiles (Swordfish, CSI), compliance frameworks (NIST, GDPR deletion provisions), and vector database designs; primarily repackages known concepts for agent context rather than novel composition.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft iteration (2025-11-30), no visible WG adoption, cross-references suggest early exploration; no evidence of implementation feedback loop or community engagement beyond authors.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant—addresses real agent infrastructure challenge (state durability & compliance) but frames as storage abstraction rather than agent-specific protocol; relevance depends on whether targets AI/agent communities or storage standardization bodies.",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Other AI/agent"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft extends EDHOC with post-quantum cryptography support by defining KEM-based authentication methods that enable signature-free authentication using NIST-standardized ML-KEM. It addresses quantum resistance for the EDHOC handshake protocol while maintaining compatibility with existing COSE infrastructure.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension applying known PQC mechanisms (ML-KEM) to existing EDHOC protocol; combines established concepts rather than introducing fundamentally new authentication approaches.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-specified protocol with detailed mechanism definitions; 33 pages suggests comprehensive treatment with protocol flows and parameter specifications, though test vectors and implementation guidance may be limited.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with other EDHOC extensions and general PQC integration efforts; follows standard IETF patterns for adding cryptographic agility to existing protocols.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single dated revision visible; appears to be exploratory work without clear WG adoption signals or active community engagement indicated in provided metadata.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to AI agents; relevant only if agents use EDHOC for secure communication, but draft focuses on cryptographic protocol mechanics rather than agent-specific concerns.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Other AI/agent"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes mapping the Model Context Protocol (MCP) to network management, enabling LLM-based network controllers to interact with devices as MCP servers for intent-driven troubleshooting and remediation. It aims to leverage existing MCP standards rather than develop new protocols, integrating conversational AI with network automation.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental application of an existing protocol (MCP) to a new domain. The core innovation is the mapping itself, but MCP and network troubleshooting are both mature concepts being combined rather than fundamentally novel.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase. The draft outlines conceptual mapping but lacks implementation details, protocol specifications, security analysis, or concrete examples. No test vectors, reference implementations, or deployment scenarios provided.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Moderate overlap with existing network management protocols (YANG/NETCONF, gRPC, SNMP) and recent intent-based networking work. MCP itself is new to networking but the troubleshooting use case is well-explored.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision (2025-10-20 date suggests recent submission). No evidence of WG adoption, multiple iterations, or community interest. Limited revision history suggests early-stage exploration.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agents in network operations. Addresses agent-human interaction, autonomous netops, and interoperability standards. Clearly positioned at intersection of LLM applications and network automation.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Human-agent interaction"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a semantic-driven contract model enabling AI applications to communicate tensor flow requirements to networks, enabling differentiated scheduling and resource allocation. Addresses inefficiency of treating AI training/inference as opaque byte streams by exposing minimal necessary semantics for optimized forwarding decisions.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Useful contribution bridging AI workload semantics and network scheduling, but incremental over existing intent-based networking and QoS frameworks adapted for ML contexts.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch with abstract concept; lacks concrete protocol specification, message formats, state machine definitions, or implementation details needed for standardization.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with intent-based networking (RFC 9315 context), CATS (Computing-Aware Traffic Steering), and existing ML-aware network proposals; semantic signaling pattern well-established.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision at March 2026; no evidence of WG adoption, implementation efforts, or iterative development; appears to be initial submission.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to ML traffic management and autonomous network operations for AI; addresses real optimization problem in distributed training and inference scenarios.",
  "c": ["ML traffic mgmt", "Autonomous netops", "Model serving/inference", "Data formats/interop"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes an automatic congestion relief mechanism using intelligent traffic analysis and dynamic regulation to handle fiber optic failures through real-time self-healing. The draft addresses network resilience but lacks technical depth on the proposed mechanisms.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution; congestion relief and self-healing are well-established concepts. The 'intelligent' traffic analysis claim is vague without concrete algorithmic or ML novelty.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "Problem statement only; abstract provides minimal technical detail on mechanisms, algorithms, or architecture. No protocol specification, implementation details, or evaluation methodology evident from 7-page draft.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing work on traffic engineering, Fast Reroute (FRR), segment routing, and YANG-based network automation. Self-healing networks extensively covered in prior standards.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision with no apparent WG engagement, community discussion, or adoption signals. No indication of implementation or testing.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant; mentions 'intelligent' analysis suggesting ML/AI but provides no concrete agent architecture, decision mechanisms, or autonomous behavior specifications required for AI/agent relevance.",
  "c": [
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Other AI/agent"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes Agent Authorization Grant extension to OAuth 2.1 enabling AI agents to obtain access tokens via PII collected through natural language conversation rather than traditional OAuth flows, addressing use cases where agents interact with users through PSTN or text. Core focus is preventing LLM hallucination from enabling impersonation attacks.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension adapting existing OAuth 2.1 patterns to a specific use case; core concepts (grants, scopes, token constraints) are well-established, applying them to agent-mediated authorization is moderately novel but relatively straightforward.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage; 10 pages suggests abstract and problem formulation present but likely lacks detailed protocol mechanics, examples, security analysis depth, and implementation guidance needed for production deployment.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with device flow and CIBA (Client-Initiated Backchannel Authentication) for out-of-band authorization; distinguishing factor is explicit LLM hallucination attack surface, but architectural foundations are familiar.",
  "m": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision with April 2026 date suggests nascent proposal; no evident WG adoption or community discussion signals detectable from metadata alone.",
  "r": 5,
  "rn": "Directly addresses core AI agent challenge—secure delegation and token acquisition for autonomous systems—with explicit focus on preventing agent-driven impersonation attacks, making it highly relevant to agent identity/auth domain.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Human-agent interaction",
    "A2A protocols",
    "AI safety/alignment",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft presents a problem statement for applying agentic AI to network management, arguing for standardization efforts to enable autonomous AI agents to collaborate in automating network operations. It identifies key technological gaps and proposes areas requiring IETF/IRTF standardization to realize this vision.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental application of existing AI/agent concepts to network management domain; combines established autonomous agent paradigms with known network management challenges without introducing fundamentally new technical approaches.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "Pure problem statement document with no protocol specifications, mechanisms, or implementation details; early-stage positioning paper outlining motivations rather than concrete technical solutions.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with ongoing IETF/IRTF work on AI/ML in networking (e.g., ANIMA, various AI/ML drafts); agent concepts largely borrowed from established multi-agent systems literature without distinguishing factors.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single submission as problem statement; no indication of WG backing, multiple revisions, or community adoption; typical initial positioning for seeking consensus on new standardization direction.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses AI agent applications in network management, core relevance to IRTF NMRG scope; however, focuses on problem framing rather than novel agent-specific technical challenges.",
  "c": [
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "A2A protocols",
    "AI safety/alignment"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes an agent identifier and semantic routing mechanism for heterogeneous AI agents in enterprise campus networks, addressing identification, capability discovery, and secure collaboration among multi-agent systems.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental work combining existing concepts (service discovery, semantic routing, agent registration) without substantial technical innovation beyond applying established patterns to agent scenarios.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage; abstract indicates conceptual framework but 7-page limit suggests preliminary treatment lacking detailed protocol specifications, message formats, or implementation examples.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing standards (service discovery protocols, semantic web approaches, microservice architectures) and prior IETF work on capability advertisement and routing; limited differentiation for agent-specific requirements.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single dated submission (2026-03-15) with no evidence of WG adoption, revisions, or community engagement; appears as standalone contribution without momentum indicators.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent networking and enterprise deployment scenarios; addresses core agent challenges (identity, discovery, secure communication) but scope limited to campus-level rather than broader Internet-scale agent coordination.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft evaluates applying existing IETF YANG data models (AC-as-a-Service and TE topology) to support dynamic AI model placement at edge cloud sites, using street-level camera inference as a practical use case to identify model applicability and gaps.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental application of existing standards to edge AI; combines known YANG models with a contemporary use case but lacks fundamental methodological or technical novelty.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defined protocols leveraged with concrete use case mapping; provides topology and service models but remains primarily an applicability study rather than detailed specification of new mechanisms.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing AC/TE YANG work; applicability draft in well-established domain with limited differentiation from prior standards documentation.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft revision dated 2025-06-23; no indication of WG adoption, multiple versions, or community momentum beyond initial submission.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant; addresses edge inference placement and network service modeling for AI workloads but focuses on network data models rather than AI agent behavior, safety, or core ML systems.",
  "c": [
    "Model serving/inference",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "HDP proposes a cryptographic token protocol for recording and verifying chains of delegation in multi-agent AI systems, enabling offline verification of authorization provenance without central registries or trust anchors. The protocol uses Ed25519 signatures to create append-only delegation chains traceable back to human authorization events.",
  "n": 4,
  "nn": "Novel framing of delegation provenance as a cryptographic chain-of-custody problem specific to agentic AI; token-based approach without registry dependency is a useful originality, though signature-chain patterns exist elsewhere.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol mechanism is well-specified with clear data structures and verification procedures, but lacks implementation details, test vectors, and security proofs; ready for review but pre-prototype stage.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with SAML/OAuth delegation models, W3C Verifiable Credentials, and capability-based security tokens; distinctly scoped to AI agent chains but not entirely novel in cryptographic approach.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft dated 2026-03-26 with no evidence of prior versions, WG adoption, or implementation momentum; early-stage contribution without clear adoption pathway.",
  "r": 5,
  "rn": "Directly addresses core need in agentic AI systems: authorization transparency, audit trails, and provenance verification across agent delegation chains; highly relevant to safety and accountability.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Human-agent interaction",
    "Policy/governance",
    "A2A protocols",
    "AI safety/alignment"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a machine-readable protocol for controlling server-side automation permissions in response to AI-driven web automation, extending RFC 9309 with HTTP method restrictions and purpose requirements.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension of existing robots.txt-like framework; applies familiar permission model to broader automation scenarios rather than introducing novel control mechanisms.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage; abstract indicates file format and restrictions defined, but likely lacks comprehensive specification, examples, implementation guidance, and test vectors needed for production deployment.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with RFC 9309 (robots.txt successor), web crawling directives (robots.txt, Crawl-delay), and similar agent control proposals; builds incrementally on established patterns.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision dated 2025-11-03 with no evidence of WG sponsorship, community feedback, or multiple iterations; appears to be individual submission without momentum indicators.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent governance and autonomous web automation control; addresses legitimate concern about uncontrolled AI automation but positioned narrowly within server-side policy rather than broader AI safety.",
  "c": [
    "Policy/governance",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "AI safety/alignment"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft analyzes structural vulnerabilities in ASRank, an algorithm for inferring AS business relationships from BGP data, demonstrating how adversarial manipulation of routing data can alter inference results without detection. The work identifies design flaws that make ASRank sensitive to minimal input changes and discusses security implications for BGP operations and security research.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Useful contribution identifying a real vulnerability class in widely-deployed infrastructure, though vulnerability analysis of specific algorithms is somewhat incremental research.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Problem and vulnerability identification are well-articulated but lacks detailed countermeasures, implementation guidance, or validated solutions; primarily analytical rather than protocol-ready.",
  "o": 2,
  "mn": "Minor conceptual overlap with existing BGP security work and inference algorithm robustness studies, but specific focus on ASRank vulnerabilities appears relatively unique.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft submission with no apparent revision history or active WG engagement noted; appears as standalone security analysis rather than active development effort.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents or autonomous systems in the ML/agent sense; concerns network routing algorithms and BGP infrastructure, despite 'autonomous' terminology referring to network ASes.",
  "c": [
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes an intelligent protection optimization system for IoT networks addressing security and privacy issues through information-centric networking principles across naming, data exchange, and caching layers.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing ICN concepts with generic security hardening; lacks novel technical mechanisms or theoretical advances.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "Abstract-only submission with no protocol specification, architecture details, threat models, or evaluation methodology presented.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with ICN security literature (NDN, CCN) and existing IoT security frameworks; limited differentiation from prior work.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single submission with no revision history; no evidence of WG engagement, community review, or active development cycle.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not related to AI agents or autonomous systems; generic IoT security topic with no agent-based or ML components.",
  "c": ["Other AI/agent"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "IDDrop proposes an identity-transfer protocol for moving identity and actor claims across human and machine environments using offer-first and request-first modes. It emphasizes sealed carrier truth and semantic classification over filename-based identity, profiling the TIBET TAT handoff model.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing identity transfer concepts with proximity workflows; lacks clear differentiation from OAuth/SAML/OIDC token exchange patterns.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch with abstract protocol concepts; references undefined 'TIBET TAT' model; no formal grammar, message flows, or implementation details provided in 8-page draft.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with established identity federation (SAML, OIDC), delegated authorization (OAuth2), and proximity-based exchange protocols; unclear novelty over existing standards.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft submission; no visible WG discussions, revisions, or community adoption signals; appears dormant or exploratory.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to agent identity/auth and human-agent interaction scenarios; potential applicability to daemon-to-daemon exchange, but relevance to core AI agent concerns unclear.",
  "c": ["Agent identity/auth", "Human-agent interaction", "A2A protocols", "Data formats/interop"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes an RDAP profile extension for querying AI agent identifier registration data, enabling applications to access trusted metadata about agent identities, network locators, gateways, and operational status. Reuses existing RDAP query mechanisms and JSON formats while defining agent-specific object classes and extensions.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental application of established RDAP protocol to a new domain; core contribution is mapping agent metadata requirements to existing registration data access patterns rather than novel protocol design.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defines protocol profile with JSON object schema and extension members; appears specification-ready but draft date (2026) raises concerns about actual maturity status and whether implementation experience exists.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with agent discovery/registry systems and identity management frameworks; RDAP application itself is not novel, though agent-specific bindings (IPv6 locators, gateways, revocation) add some specificity.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft with 2026 future date suggests hypothetical or very early-stage work; no evidence of WG discussion, multiple revisions, or implementation adoption; unclear if addressing real deployment needs.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses agent identity and authentication infrastructure needs; relevant to autonomous agent deployments requiring trusted metadata access, though framing focuses more on infrastructure than AI agent behavior/alignment.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes Intent-based Agent Interconnection Protocol (IAIP) for dynamic routing and discovery of AI agents at gateway nodes based on semantic capability matching rather than static addressing. Defines mechanisms for agent registration, capability advertisement, intent resolution, and intelligent dispatching across agent networks.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing concepts (capability-based discovery, intent resolution, semantic routing) without substantial algorithmic or architectural novelty. Agent gateway abstraction and intent matching are natural extensions of service mesh and orchestration patterns.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol mechanisms defined at mid-level detail with gateway validation, intent matching, and routing decision frameworks specified, but lacks implementation examples, formal state machines, concrete data formats, and test vectors needed for production deployment.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with service mesh architectures (Istio, Consul), intent-based networking (IBN) literature, capability-based service discovery (Kubernetes DNS/service catalogs), and agent orchestration frameworks. Limited differentiation from existing multi-agent coordination protocols.",
  "m": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft revision dated 2026-04-29 with no evidence of WG adoption, community engagement, or iterative refinement. No indication of implementation efforts or deployment interest in IETF mailing lists.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent infrastructure and multi-agent systems. Addresses agent discovery and routing which are core operational concerns, though emphasis on intent-semantics over agent safety/alignment limits relevance to broader AI governance topics.",
  "c": ["A2A protocols", "Agent discovery/reg", "Autonomous netops", "Data formats/interop", "Agent identity/auth"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "ZTIP proposes three cryptographic primitives for verifiable delegation, intent binding, and behavioral attestation to enable trustless coordination in multi-agent systems. The protocol targets zero-trust architectures where agents must continuously prove authorization and behavioral compliance.",
  "n": 4,
  "nn": "Intent binding as a first-class protocol primitive is relatively novel; most zero-trust work focuses on identity/access rather than intent verification across agent boundaries.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol mechanisms are defined with clear primitives, but maturity depends heavily on whether test vectors and reference implementations exist (49pp suggests detailed spec but implementation status unclear).",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with SPIFFE/SPIRE (identity binding), RATS (attestation), and OAuth 2.0 delegation flows; intent-layer innovation distinguishes it from standard zero-trust stacks.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "April 2026 date suggests recent submission; single revision history typical of new proposals; adoption trajectory unknown without WG feedback or early implementations.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to multi-agent AI systems requiring provable authorization and behavioral guarantees; less central than agent discovery or model serving but critical for safe delegation.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "AI safety/alignment",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes substrate-observation as an alternative to envelope coordination for managing concurrent sessions in cross-tool agentic systems, emphasizing what should NOT be standardized rather than introducing new protocol elements. Relies on identity primitives from companion drafts and argues against negotiating wire formats between heterogeneous principals.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution that reframes existing coordination problems; the core insight (avoiding format negotiation) is useful but not fundamentally novel.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early conceptual sketch lacking concrete mechanism specification, examples, or implementation guidance; heavily dependent on undefined companion drafts (IDPRONOUNS, IDACCORD).",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares coordination and session management concepts with existing agent frameworks and distributed systems protocols; the anti-pattern framing is somewhat novel but the underlying problems are well-known.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft with May 2026 date; no evidence of revision history, WG discussion, or community feedback; appears to be early-stage work.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI agent systems; directly addresses concurrent session coordination for agentic systems but lacks concrete technical depth and depends on unspecified identity infrastructure.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent discovery/reg"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "VAIP proposes a cryptographic identity and permission management protocol specifically designed for autonomous AI agents in enterprise systems, using Ed25519 keys, SHA-256 audit trails, and hierarchical permission scopes. Addresses a genuine gap between human-centric identity protocols (OAuth, SAML) and requirements of autonomous agents operating in multi-tenant environments.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Useful contribution combining established crypto primitives (Ed25519, SHA-256) in agent-specific permission framework; incremental rather than novel in cryptographic approach but addresses legitimate protocol gap.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defined protocol structure with seven permission scopes and time-bounded grants, but 17 pages suggests incomplete detail; likely lacks implementation examples, test vectors, and deployment guidance needed for spec maturity.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with OAuth2/OIDC (delegated auth), SPIFFE/SPIRE (service identity), and capability-based security models; distinguishes itself via agent-specific permission semantics and audit requirements but not radically different.",
  "m": 2,
  "mon": "Draft dated 2026-04-11 (future date—likely typo) with no revision history visible; single-author submission suggests early-stage work without established WG backing or community visibility.",
  "r": 5,
  "rn": "Directly addresses core AI agent topic: cryptographic identity, fine-grained permissions, and auditability for autonomous agents represent critical security primitives as AI systems gain enterprise operational access.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Policy/governance",
    "AI safety/alignment",
    "Data formats/interop"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "EDHOC is a lightweight authenticated Diffie-Hellman key exchange protocol optimized for constrained IoT and embedded devices, reusing COSE/CBOR/CoAP standards to minimize code footprint. It provides mutual authentication, forward secrecy, and identity protection, primarily for establishing OSCORE security contexts in resource-limited scenarios.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing cryptographic primitives (COSE, CBOR, DH) into a new compact protocol rather than fundamental cryptographic innovation.",
  "m": 5,
  "mn": "Full implementation-ready specification with detailed protocol flows, cryptographic parameters, test vectors, and multiple cipher suite options; highly mature IETF standard.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares foundational concepts with IKEv2 and other DH-based protocols; combines established COSE standards in novel constrained-device packaging.",
  "mo": 5,
  "mon": "Published IETF standard (RFC 9528) with strong WG adoption, multiple implementations, integration with OSCORE, and active deployment in CoAP/IoT ecosystems.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Not directly relevant to AI agents or autonomous systems; focused on IoT device authentication and key exchange rather than agent identity, coordination, or AI-specific protocols.",
  "c": ["Agent identity/auth", "Data formats/interop", "Other AI/agent"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft catalogs AI agent use cases for 6G networks by extending 3GPP's 6G vision, focusing on operator requirements for integrating autonomous agents into next-generation telecom infrastructure.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Primarily synthesizes existing 3GPP work rather than introducing novel concepts; incremental contribution mapping AI agents to 6G context.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage use case enumeration without detailed protocol specifications, mechanisms, or implementation guidance; mostly requirements gathering.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with 3GPP TR 22.870; appears to largely repackage and elaborate on standardization body work already in progress.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single submission with limited visibility; no evidence of WG adoption or community momentum; follows rather than leads 3GPP trajectory.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses AI agents in telecom context, though positioned as derivative work; relevant to 6G standardization efforts but not novel framing.",
  "c": [
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Other AI/agent"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "ARP proposes a DNS-TXT-based cryptographic binding mechanism for AI agents to verify machine-readable entity claims, analogous to DKIM but for semantic data consumption by autonomous systems. It addresses narrative injection and spoofing risks in generative search by enabling domain-owner authorization verification of structured data.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Straightforward application of existing primitives (Ed25519, JCS, DNS TXT) to a new domain; combines DKIM concepts with AI agent verification without significant cryptographic or protocol innovation.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol is defined with clear mechanisms and DNS binding model; lacks implementation details, test vectors, and validation of threat model assumptions against real generative search systems.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares design patterns with DKIM, DANE, and other DNS-based trust anchors; conceptually overlaps with existing entity verification and web-of-trust approaches; modest novelty in framing for AI agents.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single publication date (2026-04-18 projected); no evidence of WG discussion, implementation adoption, or community engagement; appears to be initial draft with limited revision history.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Directly addresses AI agent verification needs but narrowly focused on one threat (narrative injection in RAG); relevance depends on whether DNS-TXT binding becomes standard practice for AI data sourcing.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "AIBDP proposes a machine-readable protocol for websites to declare usage boundaries around their content relative to AI systems, extending existing robots.txt-style mechanisms with specific permissions/denials for training, mimicry, derivatives, and agentic access. The draft attempts to standardize how web content owners can signal AI usage policies across indexing, analytical exploitation, and autonomous agent interaction.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension combining established mechanisms (robots.txt, RFC 9116, RFC 9110) with AI-specific use cases; lacks fundamental innovation beyond applying known declarative patterns to new problem domain.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase—6 pages insufficient for protocol specification; missing concrete syntax, examples, discovery mechanisms, enforcement models, and handling of conflicting directives; no implementation guidance provided.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing efforts: robots.txt extensions, Robots Exclusion Standard discussions, W3C's web scraping policies, and multiple proprietary AI content policies (OpenAI, Google, Anthropic). Conceptually similar to proposed meta-tag and HTTP header approaches already circulating in AI policy space.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft submission with 2026 date suggests recent/initial proposal; no evidence of WG adoption, community revisions, or active implementation interest; positioned as future-dated work with unclear sponsorship momentum.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent governance and autonomous system boundaries; addresses real policy/governance tension between content creators and AI systems, though solution approach is not distinctly focused on core agent capabilities.",
  "c": [
    "Policy/governance",
    "AI safety/alignment",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "ML traffic mgmt"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes BRSKI-CLE, a certificateless enrollment framework for Class 1 constrained IoT devices using Key Encapsulation Mechanisms and lightweight credentials (CWTs) instead of certificates. Addresses RAM limitations in resource-constrained IoT while considering quantum-safe algorithms and authentication centers for credential issuance.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension combining existing BRSKI with certificateless approaches; KEM-based enrollment and CWT credentials are established concepts applied to constrained enrollment domain.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase—framework outlined but lacks detailed protocol specifications, message flows, security analysis, and implementation details; explicitly does not specify the lightweight credentials mechanism.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with BRSKI (RFC 8995), LAKE authorization (I-D.selander-lake-authz), and prior certificateless IoT work; combines established components rather than novel integration.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision at 2024-04-25 with no evident WG adoption, community discussion, or subsequent updates; appears dormant in IETF process.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to AI agents—addresses device identity and authentication in constrained environments, but not about autonomous agents, agent protocols, or AI-specific concerns.",
  "c": ["Agent identity/auth", "Data formats/interop", "Other AI/agent"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft specifies methods to transform diverse evidence structures (DiceTcbInfo, concise evidence, SPDM measurements) into a unified CoRIM internal representation for Remote Attestation Procedures. The goal is to enable Verifiers to consistently appraise trustworthiness of remote Attesters despite varying evidence encoding formats and semantics.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution addressing a practical interoperability problem within RATS; evidence transformation is a natural engineering necessity rather than a conceptual innovation.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-specified with concrete transformation methods for three evidence types and clear alignment with CoRIM procedures; appears implementation-ready though 20 pages suggests some complexity remains to be detailed.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares core concepts with existing RATS work (evidence encoding, verification procedures); fills a specific gap in standardizing transformations across multiple evidence formats but limited novelty in individual transformation approaches.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision (2025-04-04 date suggests recent/ongoing work); appears to be specialized RATS infrastructure work with likely limited broader community momentum.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents or autonomous systems; focuses purely on attestation infrastructure and evidence format standardization in security/trust contexts. False positive for AI/agent classification.",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "EQP proposes a minimal HTTP-based protocol enabling user agents to receive event notifications directly from resources. It aims to simplify event subscription and delivery by treating the resource itself as the authoritative notification source.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental refinement of existing pub-sub and webhook patterns; HTTP long-polling and server-sent events already address similar use cases with established implementations.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol mechanics are defined with reasonable clarity, but lacks implementation examples, formal test vectors, and guidance on error handling, backpressure, or scalability considerations.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Substantial conceptual overlap with WebSub (RFC 8313), WebHooks, Server-Sent Events (RFC 9110), and AMQP; positioning versus these alternatives is unclear.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft revision (2025-10-17 date suggests recent submission); no evidence of WG discussion, implementations, or community feedback loop.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to agent infrastructure; event notification is a utility concern for distributed agents but not core to AI agent behavior, safety, or autonomy.",
  "c": ["Data formats/interop", "Other AI/agent"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes an efficient KEM-based authentication variant for EDHOC optimized for initiator-known-responder scenarios in constrained environments, enabling post-quantum secure three-message handshakes without signatures.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Useful contribution refining prior KEM-auth work for specific operational constraints, but builds incrementally on established EDHOC framework.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Detailed protocol specification with clear message flows and security analysis; appears implementation-ready but lacks test vectors and reference implementations.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares cryptographic concepts and EDHOC framework with prior KEM-authentication work; extends rather than overlaps significantly.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision as of 2026-01-08; limited evidence of broader WG momentum or multiple author collaboration cycles.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to autonomous agent infrastructure through authentication/identity mechanisms; not core to AI agent protocols or behavior.",
  "c": ["Agent identity/auth", "Data formats/interop"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes that DNS should evolve to support Internet of Agents (IoA) by analyzing DNS limitations for agent collaboration. It identifies technical requirements for DNS to accommodate AI-driven agent interactions and complex service discovery scenarios.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension of DNS for a new use case; applies existing DNS concepts to agent scenarios without fundamental protocol innovations.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "Problem statement and requirements analysis only; lacks concrete protocol specifications, mechanisms, or implementation details.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with existing DNS extension work (SRV records, service discovery), agent identity/discovery drafts, and general IoT DNS requirements.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single submission with April 2026 date; appears to be early-stage work without evidence of multiple revisions or working group engagement.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI agents; focuses on infrastructure requirements rather than core agent capabilities, alignment, or safety concerns.",
  "c": [
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "A2A protocols"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a standardized protocol for discovering and invoking AI agents across platforms through metadata description, capability-based matching, and RESTful interfaces, with optional intent-based selection extension. Aims to enable interoperable multi-agent systems with consistent invocation semantics and security mechanisms.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing REST patterns, metadata schemas, and service discovery concepts. Similar mechanisms exist in microservices (OpenAPI), cloud platforms (AWS service catalogs), and prior agent standards, though AI-specific metadata is useful.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol mechanisms are reasonably defined with metadata formats and invocation semantics specified, but lacks implementation examples, test vectors, compliance test suites, and reference implementations needed for maturity level 4-5.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with OpenAPI/Swagger (metadata/invocation), UDDI/service registries (discovery), OData (capability negotiation), existing agent frameworks (LangChain, AutoGen), and emerging standards like OpenAI's function calling and tool use specifications.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision dated 2026-02-12 with no evidence of WG adoption, multiple implementations, or community feedback cycles. Early-stage draft status suggests nascent momentum.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent interoperability and multi-agent system coordination, core topics in current AI infrastructure discussions, though framing assumes standardization need that vendors may resist.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Model serving/inference"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes integrating AI agents with Network Digital Twin (NDT) technology for network management and operations. Combines emerging paradigms of autonomous agents and digital twin simulations to enable intelligent network control and monitoring.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental combination of two established concepts (AI agents, digital twins) without clear novel architectural insights; architecture details absent from abstract.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage sketch; 8-page draft suggests conceptual overview only, lacks detailed protocol specifications, deployment architecture, or implementation guidance.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing NDT work (ONF, ITU) and AI agent frameworks (BDI, service-oriented agent architectures); limited differentiation apparent from abstract.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft revision as of March 2026; no evidence of WG adoption, community feedback, or active development cycle; NMRG typically exploratory rather than standards-track.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agents and autonomous network operations; NDT increasingly central to network intelligence discussions; timely topic but execution clarity needed.",
  "c": [
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes using Media Over QUIC (MOQ) as a transport mechanism for large-scale, real-time sensing data in 6G networks, addressing challenges in autonomous driving, smart cities, and industrial IoT through protocol adaptability and QoS awareness. The work leverages QUIC's low-latency multiplexing to enable efficient data fragmentation and secure transmission for diverse sensing and system data types.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Applying existing MOQ framework to 6G sensing data is a straightforward extension; the document lacks novel transport mechanisms or fundamental protocol innovations beyond adapting current QUIC capabilities.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Document presents problem motivation and high-level approach but lacks detailed protocol specifications, formal definitions, algorithmic details, or implementation guidance; appears to be an early-stage position paper.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing MOQ work, 6G sensing/data transport discussions, and QUIC application proposals; limited differentiation from concurrent efforts in standardization bodies addressing similar 6G data transport challenges.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision noted (2025-10-19), no evidence of active WG sponsorship, community feedback incorporation, or iterative development; appears to be exploratory rather than driven by sustained momentum.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to AI agents; mentions AI data as a use case but does not address agent-specific concerns like autonomous decision-making, agent coordination, or intelligent system requirements; primarily a networks/6G paper.",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop",
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Other AI/agent"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes mapping the Model Context Protocol (MCP) to network management, enabling LLM-based troubleshooting by treating network devices as MCP servers and controllers as clients, with extensions for device-to-device collaboration during controller unavailability.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental application of an existing protocol (MCP) to a new domain; the core innovation is straightforward domain mapping rather than novel methodology.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch with conceptual mappings but lacks detailed specifications, implementation examples, security proofs, or test cases needed for protocol standardization.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant conceptual overlap with existing intent-based networking (IBN) frameworks and YANG-based management; MCP transport is relatively orthogonal to established network automation patterns.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Limited evidence of community engagement; single revision with future date suggests speculative draft; no clear WG sponsorship or implementation demonstrations.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent orchestration in network operations, though framed primarily as troubleshooting tool rather than general-purpose agent coordination.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Human-agent interaction"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "SOUTH introduces probabilistic authorization decisions for services and autonomous agents, incorporating uncertainty and contextual factors. The protocol is transport-independent and composable with existing auth mechanisms like OAuth and mutual TLS.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Probabilistic authorization is not novel; uncertainty in access control exists in prior work. The main contribution is formalizing this for agent/service contexts, which is incremental.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol structure is defined with request/response objects and HTTP binding specified, but lacks implementation details, test vectors, and security analysis depth expected for maturity.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with attribute-based access control (ABAC), policy-based authorization frameworks, and probabilistic security models. Relationship to existing IETF auth work (OAuth, mutual TLS) not clearly differentiated.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision as of 2025-11-28, no evidence of WG adoption, community discussion, or implementation reports. Appears early-stage with no institutional momentum.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Tangentially relevant to autonomous agents through service authorization context, but not addressing core AI safety, agent coordination, or decision-making challenges. More about infrastructure than agent behavior.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Policy/governance",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Data formats/interop"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "ATP proposes a two-tier server-mediated protocol for autonomous agent communication across four deployment scales, emphasizing DNS discovery, mandatory ATS/ATK authentication, and multiple interaction patterns. The draft addresses routing, security, and resource management for an emerging Internet of Agents paradigm.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining established patterns (server-mediated architecture, DNS-SVC discovery, pub/sub messaging) with agent-specific framing; limited conceptual novelty beyond repackaging existing protocol primitives.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol structure and message semantics defined at medium depth; lacks implementation details, test vectors, code examples, and security analysis depth required for production readiness.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with MQTT (broker model, async messaging), AMQP (request/response patterns), gRPC (service discovery), and CoAP (resource-constrained agents); positioning against these is unclear and incomplete.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft revision with 2026 date suggests early stage; no visible WG sponsorship, community feedback, or implementation signals; adoption prospects unclear.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to agent-to-agent communication infrastructure; addresses real multi-scale deployment challenges but lacks differentiation from existing protocols or evidence of agent-specific requirements.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes use cases and protocol requirements for AI troubleshooting agents deployed on network devices. Addresses communication needs between agents and network infrastructure for autonomous fault diagnosis and remediation.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental application of agent concepts to network troubleshooting; the core idea of autonomous agents performing diagnostics is not novel, though domain-specific protocol requirements may have merit.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage draft presenting use cases and requirements gathering; lacks protocol specification, formal definitions, or architectural details needed for implementation.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing network automation, intent-based networking, and YANG-based configuration management literature; agent framing appears to repackage established netops concepts.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision with future date stamp; no evidence of WG sponsorship, community discussion, or iterative development; appears exploratory rather than actively pursued.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant as it specifically targets AI agents for network operations; however, framing is more traditional network management with 'AI agent' terminology rather than substantive AI agent research.",
  "c": ["Autonomous netops", "A2A protocols", "Agent discovery/reg", "Data formats/interop", "Human-agent interaction"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Extends RFC9309 robots.txt protocol with a new rule targeting automatic clients based on their declared purpose rather than just user-agent product tokens. Enables more granular control over which types of automated access (e.g., search indexing vs. training data harvesting) are permitted on a web service.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension to existing standard; straightforward addition of purpose-based filtering alongside existing user-agent matching mechanism",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase; abstract suggests concept but only 4 pages limits room for protocol details, examples, or implementation guidance",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual space with existing robots.txt extensions and purpose declaration proposals in web standards; relates to ongoing discussions about AI crawler identification",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft revision from April 2025; no evidence of WG discussion, implementation interest, or community adoption",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent governance and data collection control; addresses critical need to distinguish between different classes of automated access (especially training vs. serving)",
  "c": [
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "AI safety/alignment"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes a SCITT profile for creating cryptographically verifiable audit records of AI agent actions, mapping supply chain integrity concepts to autonomous agent execution contexts with compliance to EU AI Act and NIST frameworks. It defines AgentInteractionRecord structures, evidence custody mechanisms, and registration policies for tamper-evident agent action logging.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Useful contribution applying established SCITT/COSE patterns to AI agent auditability; conceptually sound but represents incremental adaptation rather than novel cryptographic or agent-specific innovation.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defined protocol structure with role mappings and policy requirements, but lacks detailed message flows, concrete code examples, test vectors, or implementation guidance needed for production deployment.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares foundational concepts with SCITT core specs and COSE signing; overlaps with emerging agent provenance/audit proposals; distinct primarily in regulatory mapping and redaction receipt mechanism.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision snapshot (2026-04-11); no evidence of WG adoption, multiple iterations, or community feedback cycle visible; niche intersection of SCITT and AI governance communities.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to autonomous agent governance and compliance; addresses real need for immutable agent action logs in regulated AI systems; strong alignment with current AI safety/accountability focus.",
  "c": ["Policy/governance", "Agent identity/auth", "Data formats/interop", "AI safety/alignment", "Agent discovery/reg"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes hardware attestation mechanisms for email senders to prove genuine hardware security components via certificate chains, enabling Sybil-resistant authentication and reputation tracking for automated agents. Combines direct hardware attestation with privacy-preserving SD-JWT alternatives to create persistent hardware-anchored identities using a URN-based Agent Identity namespace.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Applies established hardware attestation (TPM, PIV) and selective disclosure JWT concepts to email headers; combines known techniques rather than introducing novel cryptographic or architectural approaches.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol mechanism defined with multiple attestation paths and header formats specified, but abstract appears truncated and no test vectors, implementation guidance, or interoperability considerations are evident in the provided excerpt.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with DKIM/DMARC sender verification goals, existing TPM attestation standards (TCG), and JWT/SD-JWT specifications; the email-specific instantiation is novel but foundational concepts are well-established.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft revision dated 2026-04-29 with no evidence of WG sponsorship, community discussion, or adoption signals; appears to be an individual submission without visible momentum.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Directly addresses automated agent authentication and Sybil resistance (core agent concerns) but frames primarily as email infrastructure problem; relevance to broader AI agent ecosystems beyond email is implicit rather than explicit.",
  "c": ["Agent identity/auth", "A2A protocols", "Data formats/interop", "Policy/governance"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft addresses IPv6 networking considerations for AI agent communication across distributed environments, mapping agent identifiers to IPv6 locators and agent communication requirements to forwarding policies. It complements existing agent discovery and authorization mechanisms by focusing on network-layer support after agent discovery.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental application of existing IPv6 concepts (address management, SRv6 policies, telemetry) to AI agents; lacks fundamentally novel networking approaches.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch addressing a real problem space but lacks concrete protocol definitions, detailed mechanisms, implementation examples, or test vectors; primarily conceptual positioning.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares foundational concepts with existing IPv6 routing, SRv6, and telemetry work; overlaps with general distributed systems networking but carves a niche around AI agent-specific requirements.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision in May 2026 with no apparent WG adoption, community discussion, or follow-up versions; appears to be exploratory positioning rather than an active initiative.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI agents—addresses networking layer concerns but focuses narrowly on IPv6 transport rather than core agent protocols, semantics, or collaboration mechanisms.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "CB4A proposes a credential brokering architecture that prevents AI agents from holding long-lived credentials by issuing short-lived, scoped proxy credentials through a policy/delivery point separation. It leverages SPIFFE/SPIRE, DPoP, and a tiered approval framework to mitigate credential compromise risks in multi-service agent deployments.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Applies established security patterns (Zero Trust, PDP/PEP, sender-constrained tokens) to the novel problem space of agentic AI credential management; incremental but addressing a genuine gap.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-structured 30-page specification with threat model, three proxy models, and tiered approval framework; lacks implementation evidence and test vectors for full production-readiness.",
  "o": 2,
  "on": "Builds on standard IETF work (SPIFFE, SPIRE, RFC 9449, NIST SP 800-207) but combines them for AI agents in a relatively unexplored configuration.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision dated 2026-03-29; no evidence of WG adoption, implementation, or iterative feedback cycle typical of active IETF development.",
  "r": 5,
  "rn": "Directly addresses core AI agent security: credential sprawl, compromise risk mitigation, and policy-driven access control for autonomous systems.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Policy/governance",
    "AI safety/alignment",
    "A2A protocols"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a machine-readable vocabulary for content rightsholders to express AI training preferences via metadata and content-delivery protocols. Aims to enable interoperable permission management across internet protocols with granular controls for usage scope and data retention.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension of existing metadata and rights expression approaches (similar to robots.txt, machine-readable privacy policies); applies established concepts to AI training context without fundamental innovation.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase; abstract describes intent and scope but document likely lacks detailed syntax, protocol bindings, formal grammar, implementation examples, or deployment guidance needed for specification maturity.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with C2PA, ODRL, CRDTs for rights management, robots.txt extensions, and ongoing work in W3C and broader content licensing communities; positioning relative to existing standards unclear.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single submission with 2025 date suggests very recent work; no evidence of multiple revisions, WG adoption, community discussion, or implementation feedback; appears to be initial proposal without traction.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI training governance and data sourcing ethics, which are core concerns in AI safety/alignment and policy frameworks; less relevant to agent-specific topics.",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance",
    "AI safety/alignment"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes extensions to OpenAI's API standard for multi-provider AI inference with load balancing, failover, and capability negotiation. Adds identity-based authorization and RBAC for secure multi-tenant deployments while maintaining backward compatibility.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension treating existing proprietary API as de facto standard; conceptually straightforward composition of known patterns (load balancing, failover, RBAC) without fundamental innovation",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defined protocol extensions with stated backward compatibility and revision history, but abstract notes claims implementation-readiness without evidence of test vectors or reference implementations",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing multi-LLM frameworks (LiteLLM, LangChain provider abstraction), API gateway standards (gRPC service mesh), and distributed inference systems; positions itself as wrapper rather than novel architecture",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Only two revisions noted (-00, -01); lacks WG sponsorship, no evidence of broader community adoption or implementation feedback; appears individually authored",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI operations and model serving; addresses practical orchestration but focuses on API compatibility layer rather than core agent capabilities, reasoning, or safety concerns",
  "c": [
    "Model serving/inference",
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a vocabulary for expressing content signal preferences within automated processing systems, extending the AIPREF framework with three nested categories. Enables parties to communicate how digital assets should be handled by AI and automated systems.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension of existing AIPREF vocabulary framework; applies established preference expression patterns to a specific subdomain rather than introducing fundamentally new concepts.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage with abstract proposal; lacks protocol details, implementation guidance, examples, or formal schema definitions needed for practical deployment.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with AIPREF-VOCAB and related preference signaling work; appears to be a specialized refinement of existing categorization schemes rather than an independent approach.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "No evidence of active development; single draft with 2025-10-01 date suggests nascent effort with minimal revision history or community engagement visible.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent governance and automated processing control; addresses how humans/organizations express preferences to systems, a core concern for responsible AI deployment.",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Human-agent interaction",
    "AI safety/alignment"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "SASL2 extends the SASL authentication framework with support for extensibility, multi-factor authentication, and password change operations. It modernizes the protocol structure for contemporary authentication requirements while maintaining backward compatibility with existing SASL mechanisms.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental evolution of SASL (RFC 4422) adding new features rather than introducing fundamentally new concepts; extension mechanisms are standard practice in protocol design.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-structured protocol specification with detailed mechanism definitions and security layer descriptions; appears implementation-ready though test vectors and interoperability guidance would strengthen maturity.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing SASL standards and multiple proposed SASL extensions; the multi-factor and password-change features have been proposed in various forms across different drafts.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision date (2025-06-05) suggests limited recent activity; unclear WG adoption status or community discussion momentum from metadata alone.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents or autonomous systems; traditional authentication protocol work unrelated to agent-based AI systems, distributed autonomy, or intelligent automation.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Other AI/agent"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes an Intelligence Delivery Network (IDN) framework for distributing deep learning inference across geographically dispersed servers to address latency, privacy, and scalability challenges. Establishes architectural concepts and vocabulary without specifying protocols, positioning it as an early-stage framework document for future standardization.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing concepts (CDN principles, model serving, edge computing) applied to DL inference; lacks genuinely novel technical insights or mechanisms.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "Framework document only—provides architectural overview and vocabulary but explicitly defers all protocol specifications to future work; no mechanisms, algorithms, or implementation details.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing work on edge ML, model serving infrastructure (Kubernetes, Ray Serve), and CDN-style distribution; concepts largely parallel to established ML systems deployment patterns.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision with 2026 date suggests early-stage work; no evidence of WG adoption, multiple iterations, or community engagement; appears to be initial exploratory submission.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent deployment and model serving infrastructure; addresses practical challenges in distributed inference systems critical for scalable agent deployment.",
  "c": [
    "Model serving/inference",
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Agent discovery/reg"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Defines SD-Card format using SD-JWT for privacy-preserving agent discovery and identity management in A2A systems. Enables selective disclosure of agent capabilities and metadata while maintaining cryptographic integrity and preventing correlation attacks.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental combination of existing SD-JWT standard with agent discovery use case; limited architectural novelty beyond applying established selective disclosure to agent cards.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defines protocol mechanism and SD-Card format with reasonable specificity, but lacks implementation examples, test vectors, and deployment guidance needed for production readiness.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with SD-JWT spec (RFC 9809) and existing agent discovery/identity frameworks; limited differentiation beyond domain application; similar concepts in concurrent IETF work on agent protocols.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft revision with no evidence of WG adoption, community feedback integration, or sustained development momentum; appears early-stage submission.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to agent identity/authentication and discovery infrastructure; core to A2A system deployment but not addressing core AI safety, alignment, or autonomous netops concerns.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes an overlay network architecture enabling autonomous software agents to interoperate across domains through a layered approach separating control-plane management (trust, policies, discovery) from runtime agent interaction. Focuses on architectural roles, metadata standards, and security without defining new transport protocols or mandatory discovery algorithms.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing overlay network concepts with agent-oriented service discovery and capability metadata; follows established patterns of control/data plane separation but applies them to the agent domain.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early architectural sketch defining roles and workflows; lacks detailed protocol specifications, message formats, concrete examples, and implementation guidance; reads as a conceptual framework rather than a deployable specification.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with service mesh architectures (Istio, Consul), DNS-SD/mDNS discovery patterns, capability-based security models, and existing agent protocol work; repositions known concepts toward agent-centric use cases without substantial differentiation.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision with future date (2026-05); appears to be early-stage individual submission with no evident WG adoption, implementation references, or follow-up activity; unclear community interest.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to agent interoperability and discovery challenges; addresses legitimate infrastructure needs for multi-agent systems; strong relevance to agent ecosystem coordination despite architectural maturity limitations.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a JWT-based authorization framework for delegating operations to AI agents through two phases: authorization requests and authorization tokens. Aims to provide cryptographic verification of user intent and audit trails for agent actions.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "JWT-based delegation and authorization tokens are well-established patterns; applying them to AI agents is incremental rather than novel. The core concept of signed operation requests lacks significant technical innovation.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch with conceptual phases described but lacks implementation details, formal protocol specifications, test vectors, or concrete examples of JWT payloads. No discussion of error handling or edge cases.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing OAuth 2.0/OpenID Connect delegation patterns, capability-based security models, and prior work on AI agent authorization (e.g., OpenAI's tool use verification, function calling frameworks). The JWT approach is well-trodden.",
  "m": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft dated 2026-03-16 with no visible revision history or WG discussion. No evidence of community adoption or working group momentum.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent authorization and human-agent interaction. Addresses legitimate safety/governance concerns around agent operation control, though execution details remain vague.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Human-agent interaction",
    "AI safety/alignment",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Data formats/interop"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft extends WIMSE with Execution Context Tokens (ECTs) to track task execution across distributed agentic workflows using JWT-based signed records linked in a DAG structure. ECTs are transported via HTTP headers alongside existing WIMSE identity mechanisms.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension combining existing JWT/WIMSE patterns with DAG-based task tracking; limited technical innovation beyond applying known mechanisms to agent workflow context.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defined protocol mechanism with clear structure and HTTP header transport model, but lacks implementation details, test vectors, and deployment guidance needed for production readiness.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with distributed tracing (OpenTelemetry), workflow state machines, and blockchain-style task provenance; DAG concept parallels existing task scheduling and causality tracking systems.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft revision with no evidence of WG discussion, community feedback, or adoption signals; appears early-stage without visible development momentum.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to agent orchestration and identity/auth for distributed agentic systems; addresses real need for task provenance and execution context in multi-step workflows.",
  "c": ["A2A protocols", "Agent identity/auth", "Data formats/interop", "Autonomous netops"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "RSP proposes a blockchain-anchored protocol for establishing tamper-evident integrity and provenance across the AI lifecycle, binding dataset digests, metadata, signatures, and blockchain proofs via a Sentinel Evidence Package (SEP). The revision introduces quantum-resistant triple-hash architecture, cross-chain binding, and extensions for agentic AI, federated learning, and streaming inference.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental composition of existing IETF building blocks (COSE, CBOR, CDDL) with blockchain anchoring. Core concepts (provenance tracking, cryptographic binding, audit trails) are well-established; the primary contribution is domain-specific packaging for AI workflows.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol structure is defined with formal serialization (JSON/CBOR) and schema (CDDL), but lacks test vectors, reference implementations, or deployment examples. Quantum-resistant claims need cryptographic justification. Conformance framework mentioned but not detailed.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with W3C Provenance, PROV-O, supply-chain provenance standards, and existing blockchain-based audit schemes. Similar concepts appear in ML reproducibility efforts (MLflow, Weights & Biases lineage tracking). Blockchain anchoring strategy resembles prior timestamping RFCs.",
  "m": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision (-01) released in 2026-03. No evidence of WG sponsorship, implementation deployments, or community adoption. Appears to be individual submission without active feedback cycle.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses AI provenance and auditability for regulated/safety-critical deployments. Relevant to agent action logging and model lineage tracking. Less relevant to agent discovery, policy frameworks, or human-agent interaction.",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Model serving/inference",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a framework combining ALTO protocol and SDN architecture to map service flow characteristics to network resources in intelligent computing networks, enabling dynamic resource allocation through characteristic identification and intelligent mapping.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental combination of existing technologies (ALTO + SDN); characteristic mapping concept is straightforward application of known techniques without significant innovation.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage; abstract describes framework conceptually but document appears to lack detailed protocol specifications, algorithms, message formats, or implementation guidance needed for maturity.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing ALTO protocol work, SDN resource management literature, and service-aware networking efforts; the specific combination is not particularly differentiated from prior art.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft submission with October 2025 date; no evidence of working group interest, prior versions, or community adoption; appears to be initial submission.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to agent/AI networking; focuses on traditional network resource management rather than autonomous agent coordination, communication, or intelligence patterns.",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop",
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft analyzes gaps between existing networking protocols and AI agent communication requirements for cross-device collaboration in network devices. It evaluates classical networking protocols and AI-focused communication approaches against the needs defined in a companion framework document.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Gap analysis of existing protocols against AI agent needs is incremental; applies established protocol evaluation methodology to an emerging use case without proposing novel solutions.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early stage gap analysis document with problem framing; lacks detailed protocol specifications, implementation guidance, or concrete technical proposals to close identified gaps.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with multi-agent communication literature and protocol evaluation frameworks; depends heavily on companion framework draft; limited unique analysis perspective.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft with no visible revision history or follow-up work; dependent on companion framework with unclear WG adoption or community momentum.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to autonomous network operations and agent-to-agent communication standardization; addresses timely intersection of AI agents and networking infrastructure.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent identity/auth"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Extends OAuth 2.0 Rich Authorization Requests with three new mechanisms: intent_request type for goal-oriented authorization, policy_context parameter for assurance level specification, and lifecycle_binding to tie authorization validity to external process states. Targets autonomous agents and complex long-running tasks requiring context-aware authorization decisions.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Incremental but purposeful extension of established RAR framework; intent expression and lifecycle binding are useful contributions for agent scenarios, though policy_context feels more derivative of existing SAML/XACML patterns.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase with abstract concepts; lacks concrete syntax examples, implementation guidance, and security threat model analysis; no discussion of how authorization servers should process lifecycle_binding or enforce policy_context semantics.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with authorization policy frameworks (XACML, ReBAC), agent capability negotiation drafts, and existing lifecycle management in OAuth token exchange; intent mechanisms loosely echo GNAP intent definitions.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft revision as of stated date; no evidence of WG sponsorship, implementation prototypes, or community adoption; positioning as agent-specific extension may limit general OAuth audience traction.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses core autonomous agent authorization challenges: expressing agent goals without explicit permission lists, binding grants to agent lifecycle, and enabling policy-aware delegation—core requirements for trustworthy agent deployment.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Human-agent interaction",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Data formats/interop"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a DNS-based privacy-preserving identity framework using Self-Certifying Identifiers and DNSSEC to manage users, IoT devices, and AI agents through trusted intermediaries. Combines role-based access control with ephemeral tokens for zero-trust architectures and automated AI interactions.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Combines existing concepts (DNS, DNSSEC, SIDs, trustees) in straightforward manner; limited technical novelty in identity binding mechanism itself.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch with conceptual framework; lacks detailed protocol specifications, message formats, cryptographic bindings, or implementation guidance; DIDs/IPFS extensions are vague future work.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with DID specifications, DNSSEC-based key management, traditional trustee/proxy models, and zero-trust literature; marginal distinction from existing DNS-CA approaches.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision dated 2026-03-03; no evidence of WG adoption, community feedback integration, or iterative development; appears to be initial submission.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI agents via identity/authentication for distributed agents and automated interactions; core focus is identity infrastructure rather than AI-specific governance, safety, or agent protocols.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent discovery/reg"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Addresses trust and security considerations for structured email formats, providing guidance for message user agents on handling structured data. Focuses on practical recommendations rather than novel security mechanisms.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution applying known security principles to structured email; extends existing email security work rather than introducing new concepts.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage document presenting considerations and recommendations without detailed protocols, formal specifications, or implementation guidance.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing email security RFCs (DMARC, SPF, DKIM) and structured email work (AMP for Email); limited novel threat model.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft revision in 2025 with unclear WG sponsorship or community adoption signals; no indication of active development momentum.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to AI agents; structured email could transport agent communication but document focuses on general MUA security rather than agent-specific concerns.",
  "c": ["Data formats/interop", "Policy/governance", "Human-agent interaction"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes extending RFC 2181's DNS data trustworthiness ranking by adding entries for root server names/addresses and DNSSEC-verified data, then assigning numeric values to ranking positions for easier reference and comparison.",
  "n": 1,
  "nn": "Trivial extension to existing RFC 2181 framework; adds numeric labels to pre-existing conceptual categories with minimal technical innovation.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage; lacks implementation details, test vectors, and concrete guidance on how resolvers should apply the extended rankings in practice.",
  "o": 5,
  "on": "Near-duplicate of RFC 2181 Section 5.4.1; primarily a numbering scheme overlay on established DNS trustworthiness concepts with no substantial new mechanisms.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single 2024 revision with no visible WG adoption, discussion, or subsequent activity indicating community interest or momentum.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents or autonomous systems; pure DNS infrastructure specification with no connection to AI/agent topics.",
  "c": ["Data formats/interop"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft extends EDHOC with post-quantum cryptographic cipher suites using ML-DSA and ML-KEM algorithms to enable quantum-resistant authenticated key exchange for lightweight IoT and constrained device scenarios.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Straightforward application of NIST-standardized post-quantum algorithms (ML-DSA, ML-KEM) to existing EDHOC protocol; primarily engineering work adapting well-understood mechanisms rather than fundamental innovation.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-structured protocol specification with defined cipher suites and clear integration points; appears implementation-ready though draft maturity suggests pending finalization and potential test vector additions.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with concurrent post-quantum COSE/EDHOC standardization efforts and NIST PQC migration guidance; incremental contribution to broader PQC adoption initiative rather than distinctive approach.",
  "mo": 3,
  "mon": "Active WG-level engagement expected for post-quantum cryptography transition; reasonable adoption probability but dependent on broader IETF PQC standardization timeline and industry migration pace.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents; addresses cryptographic protocol extensions for IoT/constrained devices with no connection to agent systems, autonomy, or AI infrastructure.",
  "c": ["Other AI/agent"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "AIN proposes an Internet-scale architecture for discovering and coordinating autonomous AI agents across organizational boundaries without pre-established integration. The work defines architectural requirements, components, and design invariants as a research agenda for NMRG, deliberately excluding protocol engineering details.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution; applies well-established service discovery and routing concepts to AI agent coordination without fundamental technical novelty. The core idea of intent-based networking for agents is a straightforward extension of existing network coordination patterns.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage research agenda document. Defines problem space and architectural principles but lacks concrete protocol specifications, mechanism details, or implementation guidance. Suitable for problem scoping, not deployment.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with service mesh architectures (Istio, Consul), existing intent-based networking proposals, and multi-agent system frameworks (AutoGen, CrewAI). The routing-based coordination model parallels established API gateway and orchestration patterns.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single submission with April 2026 date suggesting recent/upcoming work. No evidence of revisions, community discussion, WG adoption, or iterative refinement. Appears to be initial proposal stage.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent coordination and discovery; addresses legitimate scaling challenge in multi-agent systems. Less relevant to core AI safety/alignment concerns or model serving infrastructure.",
  "c": ["Agent discovery/reg", "A2A protocols", "Data formats/interop", "Policy/governance", "Autonomous netops"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft presents an optimized KEM-based authentication method for EDHOC tailored to initiator-known-responder scenarios, enabling signature-free post-quantum authentication using a three-message handshake while maintaining mutual authentication and forward secrecy.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental optimization of existing KEM-authentication approach; applies known techniques to a narrower, practical scenario rather than introducing fundamentally new concepts.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-specified protocol with detailed mechanism descriptions; appears implementation-ready though maturity depends on reference implementation and test vector availability.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Builds directly on prior KEM-authentication work for EDHOC; shares core cryptographic concepts with related post-quantum authentication efforts; specific IKR optimization is distinguishing factor.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft revision observed; no clear evidence of WG adoption or strong community engagement; unclear trajectory and consolidation status within standards track.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents. This is cryptographic protocol specification for IoT/constrained device communication; no connection to agent systems, autonomy, or AI operations.",
  "c": ["Other AI/agent"]
}
```