```json
{
  "s": "This draft explores potential multicast use cases within LLM Mixture of Experts architectures, particularly for token dispatching during inference. It analyzes how networking multicast could optimize MoE token routing but lacks detailed protocol specifications or implementation guidance.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental observation of existing MoE patterns through a networking lens; multicast for distributed inference is not novel, but application framing to IETF context is moderately original.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "Early stage analysis only; no protocol definition, mechanism specification, or architectural details provided; reads as problem statement exploration rather than technical solution.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing distributed inference literature and ML systems research; multicast optimization for token routing has been explored in both academic ML systems and production serving frameworks.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision, no evidence of WG engagement or community momentum; draft appears exploratory without demonstrated interest from routing or ML operations communities.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially relevant to AI agent networking; focuses on inference optimization rather than agent protocols, coordination, or decision-making systems; weak connection to core agent networking concerns.",
  "c": ["Model serving/inference", "ML traffic mgmt", "Data formats/interop"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes IoA Task Protocol for enabling distributed collaboration among heterogeneous AI agents across diverse network environments. Defines a layered architecture with extensible messaging to support dynamic team formation, task coordination, and decentralized deployment in intelligent systems like transportation and healthcare.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing agent coordination concepts with network protocol structure; lacks clear differentiation from FIPA, multi-agent systems middleware, and emerging LLM agent frameworks.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage draft with abstract-level specification; missing protocol details, message format specifications, state machines, error handling, security mechanisms, and implementation guidance.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with FIPA ACL, multi-agent communication standards, service mesh protocols, and existing agent orchestration frameworks; novelty claims not well-substantiated against prior art.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft revision with 2026 date; no evidence of WG adoption, implementation prototypes, or community engagement; appears exploratory rather than actively developed.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses agent-to-agent collaboration and interoperability, core topics for AI systems; however, approach and positioning relative to existing solutions unclear.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Defines Agent Trust Negotiation (ATN) protocol for establishing verifiable agreements between AI agents by binding capability, delegation, provenance, and authority artifacts to DNS-discovered identities. Addresses trust and authorization gaps in agent-to-agent interactions beyond basic discovery mechanisms.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining DNS discovery with trust negotiation concepts; applies established authorization patterns (capability-based, delegation, provenance) to agent contexts without fundamental protocol innovation.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol definition appears present at 48 pages with stated artifact bindings, but abstract lacks implementation details, test vectors, or deployment guidance typical of mature specifications.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares substantial conceptual overlap with SPIFFE/SPIRE (identity binding), OAuth2/OIDC (delegation), and W3C Verifiable Credentials (provenance) frameworks; differentiation for agent-specific requirements unclear from abstract.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft dated 2026-05-17 with no visible community discussion, WG sponsorship, or implementation signals; appears nascent with minimal adoption indicators.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses agent authorization and trust establishment, core operational concerns for autonomous AI systems; relevance high despite early stage, as agent-to-agent trust is pressing standards gap.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "AI safety/alignment",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent discovery/reg"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "AEPP proposes a standardized protocol layer for discovering, executing, and verifying payment for AI agents across multiple URI schemes and naming services, using on-chain verification and cryptographic receipts. The draft claims a live reference implementation serving 1.8M agents with zero per-agent fees.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing concepts (agent URIs, payment verification, DNS naming) into a three-phase execution model; lacks genuinely novel technical mechanisms beyond standard payment+cryptographic verification patterns.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch with abstract protocol description; lacks detailed message formats, state machine definitions, error handling, cryptographic algorithm specifications, and formal examples needed for implementation interoperability.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing agent frameworks (mcp://, ANS, DNS-AID), payment protocol standards (HTLC-style verification), and agent discovery/registry systems; positions itself as a wrapper layer rather than novel protocol.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft revision dated 2026-05-15 (future date suggests hypothetical); no evidence of WG discussion, community feedback, or iterative development; live implementation claim unverifiable without public deployment details.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent infrastructure, addressing real gaps in agent execution standardization and micropayment coordination; timing aligns with growing agent ecosystem maturity.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes best practices for HTTP-based agent-to-agent communication, standardizing tool invocation via GET requests and introducing a stateless auth scheme. Attempts to address interoperability challenges in agentic systems by formalizing the Agentic Hypercall Protocol (AHP) with an economic layer via HTTP 402 status codes.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental effort combining existing HTTP semantics with straightforward agent interaction patterns; lacks architectural innovation or novel protocol mechanisms.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch of guidelines rather than implementation-ready specification; abstract lacks detail on authentication scheme, error handling, or concrete protocol state machines.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing agent frameworks (OpenAI agents, LangChain tool calling), REST conventions, and prior work on HTTP-based RPC; 402 reuse not novel.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision with minimal community signals; published as BCP draft but lacks evidence of WG adoption, implementation experience, or iterative refinement.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses agent interoperability and protocol standardization, core concerns in emerging agentic systems; timing relevant but execution preliminary.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Agent discovery/reg"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "AAP defines an authorization profile layering structured claims and validation rules on OAuth 2.0/JWT for autonomous AI agents, enabling context-aware M2M authorization with delegation chains and human oversight. It extends existing standards rather than introducing new protocols, targeting agent-to-API scenarios requiring auditable, constraint-aware access control.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension combining established OAuth 2.0, JWT, and token exchange mechanisms with agent-specific claim structures; addresses a real gap but primarily recombines existing building blocks rather than introducing fundamentally novel authorization concepts.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-structured 83-page specification with defined mechanisms, claim schemas, and validation rules; appears implementation-ready with concrete guidance, though unclear if test vectors and reference implementations are included.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with SPIFFE/SVID (workload identity), UMA (delegation/human oversight), and emerging agent-specific OAuth profiles; differentiation hinges on agent-task-context specificity, but core authorization patterns are established.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision dated 2026-02-07 with no visible prior versions or WG adoption signals; appears to be recent/initial submission with unclear community traction or competing proposals.",
  "r": 5,
  "rn": "Directly addresses core AI agent authorization challenge—autonomous systems requiring constrained, auditable delegation and human oversight—essential for production AI agent deployments and regulatory compliance.",
  "c": ["Agent identity/auth", "A2A protocols", "Policy/governance", "Human-agent interaction", "Data formats/interop"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a multi-agent framework for autonomous fault recovery in 5G/6G converged networks, enabling distributed failure detection and intent-driven policy reconfiguration across operator domains. Addresses management challenges in complex deployments like MOCN and SNPN through agent collaboration and inter-domain coordination.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental application of established multi-agent concepts to network recovery; combines existing autonomic networking and intent-based management ideas without substantial algorithmic or architectural innovation.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase with abstract framework definition; lacks detailed protocol specifications, algorithmic descriptions, message formats, state machine definitions, and concrete implementation guidance despite claims of 'protocol requirements.'",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with IETF ANIMA WG intent-based management, existing autonomic recovery proposals, and distributed network management frameworks; multi-agent coordination for networks is well-explored territory.",
  "m": 1,
  "mon": "Single submission with 11 pages suggests limited development iterations; appears to be initial draft without evidence of WG adoption, revisions, or community engagement.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI agents in networks; frames agents primarily as functional components rather than autonomous learning entities; focuses on orchestration and coordination rather than core agent AI capabilities.",
  "c": [
    "Autonomous netops",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Data formats/interop"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This document provides compliance requirements and statements for the CMC (Certificate Management over CMS) enrollment protocol, obsoleting RFCs 5274 and 6402. It specifies what makes a compliant CMC implementation without covering ASN.1 structures or transport mechanisms.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental update consolidating and clarifying existing certificate management protocol requirements; modernization of prior RFCs rather than novel contribution.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-defined compliance specification with detailed requirements for implementers; production-ready guidance for established protocol.",
  "o": 5,
  "on": "Direct replacement of RFCs 5274 and 6402; near-complete overlap with prior certificate management specifications being superseded.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Limited recent momentum; represents maintenance/consolidation of legacy PKI infrastructure rather than active protocol advancement.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents or autonomous systems; focused on traditional certificate enrollment and PKI compliance.",
  "c": ["Data formats/interop"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft extends RDAP with verification status metadata for contact information (email, phone) to improve data quality and trustworthiness. It provides a practical mechanism for registrars and registries to signal which contact fields have undergone verification and through what method.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension adding verification metadata to existing RDAP protocol; straightforward application of status indicator patterns already established in domain registries.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defines protocol mechanism with verification types and status codes; appears to have examples but lacks comprehensive test vectors and implementation guidance for cross-registry deployment scenarios.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares verification status concept with DNSSEC and email authentication frameworks; overlaps with existing registry verification practices but formalizes them for RDAP interoperability.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision as of Feb 2026; limited WG discussion signals; typical incremental RDAP extension with moderate community interest but no evidence of rapid adoption momentum.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents or autonomous systems; focuses on registrant contact data validation for domain registry operations, purely a data quality infrastructure concern.",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes CITTAMARKET Protocol for immutable identification and timestamping of AGI systems using Bitcoin's proof-of-work to create 'Sovereign Identity' records without centralized control. A four-layer architecture for distributed autonomous system coordination with priority claims anchored to specific Bitcoin blocks.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Combines existing concepts (blockchain identity anchoring, Bitcoin timestamping, AGI coordination) in straightforward manner; lacks novel cryptographic or architectural innovations beyond applying known patterns to AGI identity problem.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "Abstract-only submission with no protocol specification details, mechanism definitions, message formats, or architectural layers described. Missing formal definitions, use cases, or concrete examples required for protocol specification.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Substantial overlap with existing blockchain identity systems (Decentralized Identifiers/DIDs), Bitcoin timestamping services, and AGI governance frameworks. Priority claims via blockchain blocks are not novel. Lacks differentiation from prior art.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "No evidence of community adoption, working group engagement, or iterative development. Single draft with future date and vague Bitcoin block references suggest speculative rather than genuine standardization effort.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to AI agent topics through AGI identity framing, but core mechanism (blockchain timestamping) is infrastructure/identity-layer rather than addressing actual AI agent coordination, safety, discovery, or interaction problems.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Other AI/agent"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a URI scheme for identifying and configuring LLM endpoints, similar to database connection strings, encoding provider, model, credentials, and inference parameters into a portable format. Seeks IANA registration as provisional per RFC 7595.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental application of existing URI scheme patterns to a new domain; straightforward extension of well-established database URI conventions without significant technical innovation.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Appears to define the core protocol mechanism with likely syntax and semantics, though maturity level depends on presence of examples, edge cases, and implementation guidance not visible in abstract.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with existing URI schemes (RFC 3986) and connection string standards; related to emerging LLM API standardization efforts but distinct from protocol-level specifications.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft revision visible; no evidence of WG adoption, multiple implementations, or community discussion; niche use case with limited visibility.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent infrastructure, particularly model serving and agent-to-LLM communication patterns; useful for standardizing LLM endpoint discovery and configuration.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Model serving/inference",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "A2A protocols"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes DNS-AID, a DNS-based discovery mechanism for AI agents using existing DNS namespaces and record types to advertise agent metadata and capabilities. The mechanism specifies which access protocol and data format to use without defining the actual information structure.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental application of DNS SRV/TXT record patterns to AI agent discovery; straightforward extension of established DNS service advertisement conventions without novel technical approaches.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defines a structured mechanism with DNS namespace conventions and record usage model, but abstract on actual implementation details; appears ready for protocol specification but lacks concrete examples and test vectors.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with DNS-SD (mDNS/Bonjour), SRV records, and existing service discovery frameworks; conceptually similar to TLSA/DANE for certificate discovery; reinvents established DNS patterns for a new domain.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft revision with 2026 date; no evidence of WG activity, community discussion, or follow-up iterations; appears as proposal-stage work without demonstrated momentum.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses agent discovery infrastructure, a legitimate concern for multi-agent systems; however, frames it as DNS-specific rather than agent-centric, making it more about DNS namespace utilization than core AI agent problems.",
  "c": [
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "A2A protocols"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "SCEP is a standardization of an existing, widely-deployed PKI enrollment protocol that uses PKCS#7 and PKCS#10 over HTTP. This draft documents a mature protocol with extensive real-world implementation rather than introducing novel techniques.",
  "n": 1,
  "nn": "Purely standardization of existing VeriSign/Cisco protocol; no novel cryptographic or architectural contributions",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-defined protocol specification with clear message flows and established implementations across PKI vendors and endpoints",
  "o": 5,
  "on": "Near-complete overlap with original VeriSign protocol and multiple vendor implementations; primarily a formalization effort rather than new design",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision visible; standardization of legacy protocol with stable installed base but limited ongoing development activity",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Certificate enrollment protocol with no relevance to AI agents, autonomous systems, or agent communication protocols",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent identity/auth"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "N-ACT proposes a standardized protocol for AI agents to discover and invoke third-party tools/APIs, targeting enterprise integration scenarios. It defines two main functions: tool enumeration (for agent designers and optional LLM runtime use) and tool invocation across domain boundaries.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution; tool integration and API abstraction for agents is well-established territory. The draft essentially wraps existing patterns (function calling in OpenAI spec) into a named protocol without significant technical innovation.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage. Abstract describes intent clearly but document maturity unclear from title page alone; likely lacks detailed protocol mechanics, formal grammar, security considerations, and implementation guidance typical of mature IETF specs.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with OpenAI function calling spec (which it explicitly extends), Anthropic tool use, and emerging agent framework standards. Also overlaps with semantic web service discovery (WSDL-era concepts). Limited differentiation articulated.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Appears to be a single-revision independent submission (2025-10-20 date, no prior versions evident). No indication of WG adoption, community discussion, or iterative refinement. Limited signals of momentum.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI agents—focuses on tool integration which is a real operational concern, but addresses a narrow tactical problem rather than foundational agent architecture, safety, or coordination challenges.",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Human-agent interaction"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "WLP v0 specifies a protocol for converting AI research hypotheses into executable wet-lab automation instructions, positioning itself as a longevity-research equivalent to existing photoresist automation protocols with reference implementations in Rust and Python.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution applying existing automation schema patterns (SCP) to a new domain (wet-lab/longevity research) rather than introducing fundamentally new concepts",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol definition appears reasonably specified with reference implementations provided, though v0 status and 6-page limit suggest incomplete specification detail typical of early drafts",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with SCP and general AI-to-automation instruction translation frameworks; domain-specific but not architecturally novel",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision (v0), May 2026 date suggests recent/speculative draft with no evidence of WG discussion or adoption momentum in IETF context",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant as a data format/interoperability mechanism for AI agent outputs, but narrowly scoped to wet-lab automation rather than addressing core agent AI challenges",
  "c": ["Data formats/interop", "Model serving/inference", "A2A protocols"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "AGENTS.TXT proposes a plaintext policy file format similar to robots.txt for controlling automated clients and bots, with strict hash verification and fail-safe restrictive defaults for malformed files. The specification aims to standardize bot access control across the web with mandatory compliance behavior.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension of robots.txt concept; applies established web policy patterns to agent control without fundamental innovation.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol mechanics defined with directives and verification requirements, but 5-page draft likely lacks comprehensive examples, edge cases, and implementation details needed for production deployment.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with robots.txt, similar conceptually to RFC 9309 (robots.txt update); unclear differentiation or advantages over existing web crawling standards.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision dated 2026-04-10 with no evidence of WG adoption, community discussion, or iterative development.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to AI agents; applies to automated clients generally but doesn't address LLM-specific concerns, model governance, or modern AI safety requirements.",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent identity/auth"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a cryptographic protocol where users pre-sign authorization receipts with scope, time, and instruction boundaries before delegating control to AI agents, with signatures published to append-only logs to prevent operator tampering.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Combines existing primitives (signed authorizations, append-only logs, delegation tokens) in a new arrangement for AI agents; the core insight of pre-signature + immutable log is useful but not fundamentally novel in cryptographic authorization design.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early specification phase—defines protocol structure and objectives but appears to lack implementation details, test vectors, concrete API specifications, and security analysis of edge cases (log availability, key compromise recovery).",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with OAuth 2.0 delegation flows, capability-based security (OCAP), and audit logging standards; distinct from but related to work on agent attestation and model input validation.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft revision dated 2026-05-19; no evidence of WG adoption, community discussion, or iterative refinement; unclear if this addresses a recognized IETF priority.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses authorization and accountability in AI agent deployments, a critical concern as agents execute user-delegated tasks; highly relevant to emerging agent governance needs.",
  "c": ["Agent identity/auth", "Policy/governance", "Human-agent interaction", "AI safety/alignment"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Identifies the gap between current identity systems (which authenticate software) and the need for human-anchored agent identity that maintains verifiable provenance, scoped delegation, and human authority across distributed agent ecosystems. Positions this as a foundational architectural problem rather than a protocol solution.",
  "n": 4,
  "nn": "The framing of 'human anchoring' as distinct from traditional software identity is novel; most identity systems treat agents as autonomous entities. The emphasis on provenance chains and scoped delegation across heterogeneous agent contexts addresses a genuine gap.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "Pure problem statement with no proposed mechanisms, protocols, or implementation guidance. Serves as motivation document but lacks architectural sketches or technical depth needed to guide solution development.",
  "o": 2,
  "on": "Moderate overlap with OAuth 2.0 delegation models and W3C Verifiable Credentials work, but the specific lens of human-agent authority chains in autonomous systems is underexplored in IETF.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft dated 2026-04-01 with no visible revision history or WG adoption signals. Problem space is timely but document lacks indicators of sustained community traction.",
  "r": 5,
  "rn": "Directly addresses core AI agent infrastructure challenge: how to maintain human accountability and control as agents proliferate. Highly relevant to emerging autonomous systems governance concerns.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Human-agent interaction",
    "A2A protocols"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes a mechanism to restore original From: headers in emails processed by Mailing List Managers (MLMs) that rewrite them due to DMARC authentication requirements. It uses an author-centric strategy where signing agents enable reversal of MLM transformations at the receiving end.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental solution to known DMARC-MLM compatibility problem; builds on existing authentication and header manipulation concepts rather than introducing fundamentally new mechanisms.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defines a protocol mechanism with clear strategy and methodology, though document length (17pg) and presentation suggest it may lack comprehensive implementation guidance or test vectors expected of higher maturity specs.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Related to existing DMARC, ARC, and MLM literature; shares concepts with multiple prior proposals addressing From: header rewriting but presents a distinct author-centric approach.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision dated 2024-11-22 with no evidence of working group adoption, multiple iterations, or community discussion driving continued development.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents or autonomous systems; purely focused on email authentication and mailing list infrastructure—no connection to AI safety, agent protocols, or autonomous operations.",
  "c": ["Other AI/agent"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes Integrated Sensing and Communications (ISAC) as a use case scenario for CATS (Computing, Automation, and Network Slicing), exploring how joint optimization of sensing and communication functions can enable autonomous systems and smart city applications.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "ISAC is an established concept; the contribution is primarily framing it within CATS context rather than introducing novel sensing-communication integration principles.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase—presents motivation and potential applications but lacks detailed protocol specifications, technical requirements, or implementation considerations for ISAC-CATS integration.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing ISAC literature and 3GPP work on sensing; positioning within CATS adds minimal differentiation; unclear how this differs from parallel ISAC standardization efforts.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision document with limited evidence of community engagement; ISAC momentum exists separately, but ISAC-specific CATS momentum appears nascent.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to AI agents—addresses autonomous system coordination and networked perception but focuses on wireless infrastructure and communication rather than agent reasoning, decision-making, or AI-specific concerns.",
  "c": [
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "AEBA proposes a behavioral monitoring framework for autonomous AI agents, adapting enterprise UEBA concepts to agent security. It defines event schemas, identity binding, baseline protocols, and SIEM interoperability for cross-framework agent deployments.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Straightforward adaptation of existing UEBA methodology to agents; core concept is incremental extension rather than novel.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol mechanisms and schema defined, but unclear if implementation-ready; no evidence of test vectors or reference implementations.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with UEBA frameworks and general SIEM event correlation; agent-specific aspects are relatively narrow additions to established patterns.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision with 2026 date suggests early-stage work; no indication of WG adoption, community engagement, or iterative refinement.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to autonomous agent security monitoring; timely given AI agent proliferation, though execution rather than foundational.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "AI safety/alignment",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "HPKE is a standardized hybrid public key encryption scheme combining asymmetric KEMs with symmetric AEAD, offering authenticated variants for secure communication. This CFRG product provides practical instantiations using ECDH, HKDF, and SHA2 for arbitrary-sized plaintext encryption.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing primitives; the hybrid encryption concept is well-established, though the specific modular design and authenticated variants represent useful standardization rather than fundamental novelty.",
  "m": 5,
  "mn": "Implementation-ready specification with detailed protocol description, test vectors, and multiple instantiations across 125 pages; mature CFRG deliverable suitable for deployment.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing hybrid encryption schemes (ElGamal+AES models) and authenticated encryption frameworks; addresses standardization gaps rather than introducing conceptually new combinations.",
  "mo": 5,
  "mon": "Strong community momentum evidenced by CFRG endorsement, active adoption in protocols like TLS 1.3, QUIC, and MLS, with widespread implementation across cryptographic libraries.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents, autonomous systems, or distributed agent protocols; this is pure cryptographic infrastructure with no agent-specific application or consideration.",
  "c": ["Other AI/agent"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a semantic contract mechanism allowing AI applications to communicate tensor flow requirements to networks, enabling differentiated scheduling and resource allocation based on application semantics rather than treating traffic as opaque byte streams. Targets improved resource utilization in distributed training and inference scenarios across heterogeneous computing environments.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Useful contribution bridging application semantics and network-layer optimization, but builds incrementally on existing QoS and intent-based networking concepts applied to AI workloads.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage—abstract describes high-level concept but 6 pages insufficient for protocol definition; lacks concrete message formats, state machines, or implementation details.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with intent-based networking (IBN), application-aware networking (AAN), and existing DiffServ/QoS contracts; similar ideas explored in SDN and ML-specific network optimization work.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft publication (2026-03-02) with no evident revision history or WG adoption signals; appears early-stage without demonstrated community engagement.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI infrastructure and model serving/inference optimization; addresses real pain point in distributed training networks but not core to agent behavior or autonomy.",
  "c": ["ML traffic mgmt", "Model serving/inference", "Data formats/interop", "Autonomous netops"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes gateway requirements for Dynamic Multi-agents Secured Collaboration (DMSC) systems to improve scalability, communication efficiency, and security. Identifies gaps in existing hardware/software gateways and argues for a specialized DMSC Gateway entity.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental work applying existing gateway concepts to multi-agent systems; lacks architectural novelty or algorithmic innovation.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "Problem statement and requirements document only; no protocol specification, mechanisms, or implementation details provided; appears preliminary.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing gateway, load balancing, and multi-agent middleware literature; DMSC appears undefined, limiting distinctiveness assessment.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision with 2026 date; no evidence of WG discussion, community engagement, or iterative development; appears dormant.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to multi-agent systems but focuses on infrastructure/gateway requirements rather than core AI agent capabilities, protocols, or intelligence aspects.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a JSON-based audit logging standard (AAT) for autonomous AI systems with hash-chained tamper-evidence and multi-framework compliance (EU AI Act, SOC 2, ISO/IEC 42001). Addresses regulatory mandates for high-risk AI event recording while supporting GDPR-compatible deletion and multiple transport formats.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Useful contribution standardizing AI agent logging; combines existing concepts (hash chains per RFC 8785, syslog, ECDSA signatures) in domain-specific format rather than novel cryptographic or protocol innovation.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-structured specification with defined JSON schema, field taxonomy, hash-chaining mechanism, and multi-format export; lacks explicit test vectors, reference implementation, or deployment examples for full maturity.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares core concepts with CEL (Common Expression Language), COSE (RFC 9052) for signing, and general audit trail patterns; distinguishes itself through AI-agent-specific field semantics and regulatory mapping rather than fundamental novelty.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single dated revision (2026-03-29); no evidence of WG sponsorship, multiple iterations, or community adoption signals; EU AI Act deadline creates external urgency but document shows limited internal momentum.",
  "r": 5,
  "rn": "Directly addresses core AI agent governance and auditability; highly relevant to autonomous system deployment, regulatory compliance, and agent trustworthiness—central to safe agent operation.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Other AI/agent"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a framework for LLM-assisted network management with human oversight, including enhanced telemetry, LLM decision modules, and standardized interaction models. Aims to integrate AI-driven automation into existing network operations while maintaining human control and compatibility with current management systems.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental application of existing LLM concepts to network management; human-in-the-loop and telemetry integration are established patterns, lacking novel architectural or algorithmic contributions.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage framework definition with abstract concepts; missing detailed protocol specifications, concrete data models, implementation guidelines, and validation methodologies needed for standardization.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with broader AI-for-network-operations discussions and existing network telemetry standards; human-in-the-loop AI concepts are well-established in other domains.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft revision (2025-09-14); no evidence of WG adoption, implementation activity, or community feedback; positioned in IRTF research group rather than standards track.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses LLM integration in network operations with focus on human-agent interaction and autonomous netops, though AI safety and governance aspects receive limited treatment.",
  "c": [
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Human-agent interaction",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "CAP proposes a kernel-enforced three-tier prohibition architecture for agentic AI systems, with absolute treaty-based prohibitions, jurisdiction-specific rules, and voluntary standards, evaluated against both agent actions and human principal decisions. The draft introduces Jurisdictional Conflict Resolution to surface irreconcilable conflicts to humans via escalation mechanisms.",
  "n": 4,
  "nn": "Three-tier prohibition model with dual evaluation points (agent + human principal) is a genuinely novel approach to AI safety enforcement; kernel-level enforcement architecture breaks from typical application-layer controls.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase; abstract describes mechanism concepts but 24 pages likely insufficient for detailed protocol specification, implementation details, or formal semantics; referenced I-D dependency suggests incomplete framing.",
  "o": 2,
  "on": "Minor similarities to existing AI policy/governance frameworks and constitutional AI concepts (Anthropic), but the kernel-enforcement dual-evaluation architecture and JCR mechanism appear distinct from established approaches.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft with future-dated publication (2026-05-17); no evidence of WG adoption, multiple revisions, or community engagement; appears speculative or early-stage.",
  "r": 5,
  "rn": "Directly addresses core challenges in AI agent governance, safety alignment, and human-agent interaction; prohibition enforcement is fundamental to responsible agentic AI deployment.",
  "c": ["AI safety/alignment", "Policy/governance", "Human-agent interaction", "Agent identity/auth", "A2A protocols"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Establishes vendor-neutral benchmarking terminology for Ethernet fabrics supporting distributed AI training and inference, consolidating and extending definitions from RFCs 1242 and 8238 with AI-specific KPIs, collective communication primitives, and RDMA mechanisms.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution; primarily a terminology standardization effort consolidating existing concepts (RFCs 1242, 8238) with incremental AI-fabric-specific extensions rather than introducing novel benchmarking approaches.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-defined terminology document with companion methodology drafts; structured as a reference standard with precise definitions, though implementation guidance and test vectors are delegated to companion documents.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with RFC 1242 and RFC 8238 benchmarking frameworks; explicitly extends existing standards rather than proposing independent methodology, with stated precedence over prior RFCs in AI fabric context.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Limited momentum indicators; single revision date (2026-02-27) with two companion drafts suggest organized work, but no clear WG adoption signals or community feedback evident from abstract alone.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI infrastructure; addresses critical gap in standardized terminology for AI fabric benchmarking, essential for comparing distributed training/inference systems, though terminology definition rather than core agent capability.",
  "c": ["ML traffic mgmt", "Data formats/interop", "Model serving/inference", "Other AI/agent"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft defines an OAuth Transaction Token profile for Agent-to-Agent communication, enabling distributed agents to maintain identity and authorization context across call chains within trusted domains. It addresses the emerging need to apply established OAuth mechanisms to autonomous agent workloads.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension applying existing OAuth Transaction Token concept to A2A scenarios; straightforward adaptation rather than novel cryptographic or architectural innovation.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early specification draft (5 pages) likely presenting conceptual framework; insufficient detail to assess implementation completeness or testing readiness.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares core concepts with OAuth 2.0 Transaction Tokens and existing agent authorization work; moderate overlap with concurrent A2A security proposals in emerging standards.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single recent revision; no evidence of WG discussion, implementation feedback, or adoption signals in IETF ecosystem.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to agent identity and authorization; addresses practical security need for autonomous agent orchestration, though framed within OAuth rather than AI-specific context.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Data formats/interop"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "VIRP proposes a cryptographic trust framework for autonomous and human operators managing live network infrastructure, using dual-signature schemes, two-channel separation, and trust tiers to ensure observation integrity and authorized state changes. The draft includes multi-vendor implementation against 35+ devices and formal verification of protocol security under Dolev-Yao adversary model.",
  "n": 4,
  "nn": "Novel integration of cryptographic primitives specifically designed for autonomous agent operations on infrastructure; dual-signature approach and two-channel intent/observation separation are non-obvious architectural choices distinct from traditional PKI frameworks.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Detailed protocol specification with live multi-vendor implementation (IronClaw) against production hardware; formal verification via ProVerif and Tamarin demonstrates maturity, though full test vectors and edge-case handling may be incomplete.",
  "o": 2,
  "on": "Minor overlap with NETCONF/YANG security models and PKI frameworks; the agent-specific trust tiers and dual-signature scheme differentiate from existing infrastructure protocols, though intent gating resembles capability-based security patterns.",
  "m": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft submission dated 2026-05-21 with no evidence of WG adoption, revision history, or community discussion; appears to be early-stage proposal without demonstrated ecosystem momentum.",
  "r": 5,
  "rn": "Directly addresses core challenge of autonomous agent trustworthiness in critical infrastructure; agent identity, authorization, human-agent interaction, and autonomous netops are all central to the proposal.",
  "c": [
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "AI safety/alignment",
    "Human-agent interaction",
    "Policy/governance",
    "A2A protocols"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft outlines security requirements for AI agents across their lifecycle stages including provisioning, registration, discovery, and access control in cross-domain environments. It addresses authentication, authorization, and identity management for autonomous AI systems operating in interconnected networks.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution applying established security patterns (identity, provisioning, access control) to AI agents without demonstrating novel threat models or architectural innovations specific to autonomous AI systems.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage requirements document; lacks detailed protocols, formal specifications, implementation examples, or test vectors needed for actual deployment guidance.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing IETF security frameworks (CBOR security, RFC 8174 requirements language), OAuth/OIDC patterns, and general device security provisioning standards; limited AI-agent-specific differentiation.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision as recent draft with no visible WG adoption, community implementation work, or indication of ongoing development momentum.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent security landscape; addresses real operational concerns, though framing as generic requirements rather than emerging AI-specific threat vectors limits scope clarity.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Policy/governance",
    "A2A protocols"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "AIGA 1.0 proposes a tiered risk-based governance framework for autonomous AI agents using immutable kernel architectures, federated authority networks, and economic incentive alignment. The protocol targets real-world deployment constraints with advanced mechanisms like multi-vendor TEE attestation and human review boards for high-assurance scenarios.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Tiered governance + federated authority + economic incentives is a useful synthesis, but federated trust networks and risk-based access control are established patterns; the AI-agent-specific application is incremental rather than architecturally novel.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Protocol architecture is described at high level with component names and concepts, but lacks detailed message formats, state machines, cryptographic bindings, implementation guidance, and concrete test vectors needed for interoperability.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing work: federated PKI/trust (DANE, DNSSEC precedents), TEE attestation (TCG specs), action-based authorization (ABAC frameworks), network quarantine (BGP flowspec), and multi-sig approval (blockchain governance). Core concepts not unique.",
  "m": 2,
  "mon": "Single 2026 revision with no visible WG discussion, community feedback, or adoption signals; appears to be individual submission without demonstrated implementer interest or iterative refinement.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to autonomous AI agent governance and policy enforcement, a topic of growing IETF interest; however, scope is broader than typical IETF protocols (governance, economics, human oversight) and may belong in an AI/ML working context rather than general standards.",
  "c": [
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "AI safety/alignment",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Human-agent interaction"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft explores ALTO (Application-Layer Traffic Optimization) in multi-domain network scenarios where traffic paths span multiple autonomous networks. It presents three use cases, identifies challenges, and outlines implementation solutions to enable cross-domain network information sharing.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension of ALTO to multi-domain contexts; domain federation concepts are well-established in networking, though application to ALTO is moderately useful.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage with use cases and challenges outlined but limited protocol detail; implementation solutions mentioned but not formally specified or validated.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares core concepts with existing multi-domain networking standards (BGMP, federation protocols); ALTO itself addresses cross-domain scenarios inherently, limiting novelty of extension.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision at 2024-01-11 with no apparent prior versions or subsequent activity; appears inactive or exploratory rather than driven by active WG consensus.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to AI agent topics; focuses on network optimization infrastructure rather than AI agent communication, autonomy, or decision-making. Not core to AI/agent systems.",
  "c": ["Data formats/interop", "Policy/governance", "Agent discovery/reg"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft analyzes network-assisted optimization techniques for collective communication operations in AI training clusters, identifying gaps between emerging approaches and current IETF standards like iWARP. It proposes requirements for standardizing collective acceleration mechanisms compatible with RDMA-based parallel computing infrastructure.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution; applies known collective optimization concepts to RDMA standards context, but lacks novel technical mechanisms or architectural insights beyond problem articulation.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage requirements document; presents problem analysis and gap identification but lacks detailed protocol specifications, implementation examples, or technical solutions.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing work on collective communication optimization (MPI, NCCL) and network-assisted acceleration; limited differentiation from prior research in HPC networking.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision as of submission date (2025-01-09); no evidence of WG sponsorship, community discussion, or iterative development momentum.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI infrastructure but focuses narrowly on transport optimization rather than AI agent systems, model serving, or agent-specific requirements.",
  "c": ["ML traffic mgmt", "Model serving/inference"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft specifies methods to transform heterogeneous evidence structures (DiceTcbInfo, SPDM measurements, concise evidence) into a unified CoRIM internal representation for remote attestation verification. It addresses the practical challenge that verifiers must handle multiple evidence encoding formats while preserving semantics during appraisal procedures.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution focused on standardizing evidence format conversions within existing RATS/CoRIM frameworks rather than introducing novel attestation or transformation concepts.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-specified protocol with detailed transformations for multiple evidence types and clear mappings to CoRIM; appears implementation-ready though test vectors not mentioned in abstract.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Builds directly on CoRIM, DICE, and SPDM standards with moderate overlap; addresses a recognized interoperability gap but within established architectural constraints.",
  "mo": 4,
  "mon": "Active WG development (RATS) with clear problem motivation; draft targets known ecosystem fragmentation (DICE/SPDM/CoRIM heterogeneity) driving adoption potential.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents or autonomous systems; focuses on hardware/firmware attestation infrastructure and verifier decision-making, domain-specific to trustworthiness assessment rather than agent-oriented protocols or intelligence.",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent identity/auth"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "ANS proposes a DNS-like protocol for AI agent discovery and registration using PKI certificates and a modular adapter layer supporting multiple communication standards. It addresses secure agent identity verification and multi-agent system interoperability through structured JSON-based communication.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution applying established DNS patterns and PKI to agent discovery; core concepts (naming, registration, certificate-based trust) are well-known, though their specific combination for agents is somewhat novel.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defined protocol with structured schemas and threat analysis, but lacks implementation details, deployment guidance, and operational considerations needed for production systems.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares significant concepts with service discovery (mDNS, Consul), PKI/X.509 standards, and existing agent communication frameworks (MCP, ACP); positioning relative to these is unclear.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision dated 2025-11-18 with no evidence of WG adoption, community feedback integration, or iterative development momentum.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent ecosystems; agent discovery and secure identity are genuine problems, though draft conflates multiple distinct concerns (naming, discovery, protocol adaptation, PKI).",
  "c": [
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "CHEQ proposes a protocol for human-in-the-loop confirmation of AI agent decisions and actions, integrating with MCP, A2A, and N-ACT protocols while protecting user privacy. It aims to prevent unwanted actions from AI hallucinations through signed confirmation objects before execution.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution addressing a real operational need (HITL safeguards), but the core concept of human confirmation gates is well-established; primary novelty is packaging this as an interoperable protocol layer.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase—15 pages suggest concept definition but likely lacks implementation details, comprehensive protocol state machines, error handling, or test vectors needed for production deployment.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual territory with existing HITL systems, approval workflows, and policy enforcement mechanisms; some overlap with MCP extensions and general agent governance frameworks, but claims focus on integration with multiple protocols differentiates it.",
  "r": 5,
  "rn": "Directly addresses critical AI agent safety and governance—human-in-the-loop decision confirmation is core to trustworthy autonomous system deployment and aligns with emerging agent standardization efforts.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision (2026-04-22 date); no evidence of WG backing, community adoption, or competing implementations; early-stage IETF submission without demonstrated momentum.",
  "c": [
    "Human-agent interaction",
    "AI safety/alignment",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent identity/auth"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Defines a DNS TXT record-based discovery mechanism for Model Context Protocol servers, extending it to advertise organizational identity and individual cryptographic identity envelopes bound to sovereign handles. Complements HTTPS discovery with a lightweight, DNSSEC-validated bootstrap approach.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension applying established DNS-based identity patterns (DKIM, SPF, DMARC, MTA-STS) to MCP server discovery; the core novelty is adapting existing techniques to a new protocol rather than introducing fundamentally new concepts.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defined protocol mechanism with three TXT record types and DNSSEC/DANE requirements specified, but lacks implementation evidence, test vectors, and deployment guidance; appears spec-complete but not implementation-ready.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual space with service discovery (SRV records), organizational identity bootstrapping (DMARC/SPF patterns), and certificate pinning (DANE), but applies them in novel combination for MCP; moderate overlap with existing DNS identity infrastructure.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Single revision cycle visible (v01→v02→current); modest update cadence suggests early-stage development; unclear if driven by working group or individual contributor effort.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to agent discovery, registration, and authentication infrastructure; enables decentralized identity binding for MCP agents operating across domains; high relevance to autonomous agent interoperability.",
  "c": [
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Defines a protocol for AI agents to discover and invoke third-party tools/APIs, standardizing tool enumeration and invocation operations to reduce enterprise integration costs. Builds on OpenAI specifications with focus on enterprise agent-to-tool interactions.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental work; tool use in LLMs is established practice (OpenAI functions, ReAct), and this appears to formalize existing patterns rather than introduce novel concepts.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol appears reasonably defined with enumeration and invocation features specified, but abstract lacks concrete message formats, error handling details, or implementation guidance expected at maturity level 4.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with OpenAI's function calling spec, ReAct framework, and emerging A2A protocols. Unclear how this differs substantively from existing tool-use standardization efforts.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft revision (2026-05-10 date suggests recent submission); no evidence of WG sponsorship, multiple revisions, or community engagement visible from abstract.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent operations and tool integration—core concern for enterprise AI systems, though narrow in scope (excludes agent-to-agent, policy, safety aspects).",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Human-agent interaction"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "JIS proposes a dual-keypair identity protocol for autonomous agents with trust negotiation and human-readable intent tracking, designed as a semantic layer integrating with multiple related standards. The work addresses identity binding and context capture for agent interactions but relies heavily on undefined companion specifications.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Dual-keypair separation (HID/DID) is incremental over existing PKI patterns; intent declaration binding is useful but not fundamentally novel. Heavy dependence on undefined standards (TIBET, UPIP, RVP, AINS) limits independent assessment of originality.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage. 25 pages appears insufficient for a complete protocol specification. Abstract references undefined companion drafts, missing implementation details, test vectors, and threat model analysis needed for maturity assessment.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing identity/trust frameworks (SAML, OAuth 2.0, SPIFFE/SPIRE, DID specifications). The 'Humotica' context layer is novel but the core identity mechanisms appear largely combinatorial of existing patterns.",
  "m": 1,
  "mon": "No evidence of community momentum. Single draft, no visible WG discussion, no adoption signals, no implementation reports. Future date (2026-03-29) suggests speculative or aspirational work.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to autonomous agents. Addresses agent identity and human-agent interaction directly, but applicability depends entirely on undefined companion specifications. Unclear if this solves genuine AI agent problems versus general distributed system identity.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Human-agent interaction",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent discovery/reg"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes a DNS error reporting mechanism that encodes error information in query QNAMEs to automatically notify authoritative server operators of resolution or validation failures. It leverages RFC8914 extended DNS errors to provide domain operators feedback on misconfigurations or attacks without requiring out-of-band reporting channels.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension building directly on RFC8914; the core novelty is using QNAME encoding for error signaling rather than in-band DNS responses, a pragmatic but not particularly innovative technique.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-structured protocol specification with clear mechanism description; includes monitoring agent interaction details and error encoding methodology; lacks implementation details and test vectors for full readiness.",
  "o": 2,
  "on": "Minor similarities to existing DNS monitoring and telemetry approaches (EDNS0 signaling, query logging); the QNAME-based approach is a distinct method though conceptually aligned with established error reporting patterns.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "No relevance to AI agents or autonomous systems; purely a DNS operational infrastructure improvement for error notification and domain hosting diagnostics.",
  "mo": 4,
  "mon": "Strong WG adoption indicated by IETF dnsop publication status and 2024 date suggesting active standards-track progress; multiple revisions expected in mature development cycle.",
  "c": ["Other AI/agent"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft examines AI agent communication protocols for 6G systems by referencing 3GPP TR 22.870 use cases and extrapolating service requirements. It positions itself as foundational work for standardizing agent-to-agent and agent-to-tool interactions in next-generation networks.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental work that applies existing 3GPP framework to agent communication; lacks novel protocol designs or architectural insights beyond TR 22.870 scope.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage sketch dependent on external 3GPP document; no protocol definitions, message formats, or implementation details provided in the abstract.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with 3GPP TR 22.870 and existing A2A protocol work; appears to be secondary analysis rather than original contribution.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision with April 2026 date suggests nascent work; no evidence of WG adoption, multiple iterations, or community engagement.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent systems and 6G standardization; timely topic but execution and depth unclear from abstract alone.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes integrating the Model Context Protocol (MCP) into network management to enable AI agents to discover and invoke network capabilities through a standardized interface. It outlines use cases in troubleshooting, measurement, security, and optimization while specifying functional and security requirements.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "The idea of applying MCP (an existing protocol) to network management is incremental—combining two established concepts without fundamental innovation in either domain.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "This is a problem statement and requirements document only; no protocol details, mechanisms, or implementation guidance are provided.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing work on intent-based networking, AI-driven network automation, and agent-based management systems; MCP itself is a known protocol being applied in a relatively straightforward manner.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision (dated 2026-02-14) with no visible community engagement, WG adoption, or follow-up activity yet; early-stage exploratory work.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agents in network operations and agent discovery/registration; addresses a real gap in standardized agent interfaces for infrastructure management.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Human-agent interaction"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Consolidates ND protocol security and operational issues scattered across 20+ RFCs into a unified framework, identifying three root causes and recommending subnet/link isolation strategies for mitigation in IPv6 deployments.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental synthesis work; repackages known ND problems (multicast inefficiency, trust assumptions) without proposing novel technical solutions or mechanisms.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Well-defined problem analysis with practical guidance on existing mitigation approaches (subnet isolation); lacks novel protocol specifications or implementation artifacts.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing ND security RFCs (SEND, SeND extensions, RA-Guard); consolidation effort rather than novel contribution; similar analysis in scattered prior documents.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision document dated 2025-11-21; no evident WG momentum or multiple iterations; appears as standalone consolidation effort rather than active development stream.",
  "r": 1,
  "rn": "Not relevant to AI agents or autonomous systems; focused on IPv6 Neighbor Discovery protocol operations, security hardening, and network infrastructure deployment best practices.",
  "c": ["Other AI/agent"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft proposes a DLT-neutral framework for projecting and addressing views of virtual assets across distributed ledger systems, enabling external parties to request, locate, and verify asset states or computed functions while maintaining system-specific access controls and consensus logic.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution addressing cross-chain asset interoperability; views and addressing are conceptually straightforward extensions of existing DLT bridging patterns without fundamental innovation in the core mechanism.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase with problem articulation and architectural concepts; lacks detailed protocol specifications, message formats, concrete examples, or implementation guidance needed for deployment.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing SATP work, cross-chain bridge architectures, and DLT interoperability standards; views concept parallels state projection mechanisms in Cosmos, Polkadot, and other multi-chain frameworks.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision with modest adoption signals; part of SATP family but no evidence of widespread WG engagement or implementation momentum in broader blockchain community.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to agent topics only through loose interpretation of 'external parties' and 'agents' querying systems; primarily focused on blockchain asset interop rather than AI agents, agent protocols, or autonomous systems.",
  "c": [
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent discovery/reg"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Defines authentication mechanisms for the Virtual World Region Agent Protocol (VWRAP), establishing application-layer associations between client applications and identity management services. Focuses on credential verification to grant capabilities for agent control and digital asset management in virtual environments.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution applying established authentication patterns to virtual world/metaverse contexts; adapts existing identity frameworks rather than introducing fundamentally new authentication paradigms.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defined protocol mechanism with clear objectives and architectural model, though maturity level depends on completeness of specification details and practical implementation guidance in full document.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with OAuth/OpenID Connect flows and existing agent authentication models; VWRAP-specific but not substantially differentiated from general service-to-identity-provider authentication patterns.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Limited visible momentum; single dated revision (2024-09-24) suggests early-stage or dormant WG activity; VWRAP itself appears to have niche adoption in virtual world contexts.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to agent identity and authentication, core infrastructure concern for autonomous agent systems; addresses critical capability control and asset protection in agent-centric architectures.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent discovery/reg"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "A problem statement draft advocating for IETF standardization of zero trust interoperability frameworks to enable multi-vendor deployments in cloud and remote workforce scenarios. The document identifies gaps between high-level NIST guidance and practical protocol needs without proposing specific technical solutions.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Zero trust is well-established (NIST SP 800-207); this draft merely argues IETF should work on it rather than proposing novel concepts or mechanisms.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "Pure problem statement with no protocol definitions, mechanisms, or technical specifications; extremely early stage with multiple typos suggesting rushed drafting.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing zero trust literature (NIST, industry frameworks) and related IETF work (TLS, QUIC, authorization); doesn't clearly differentiate from prior standardization efforts.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision noted; no evident WG adoption, community discussion, or follow-up activity; appears to be exploratory positioning rather than active development.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to AI agents through mention of 'intelligent agents' but provides no AI-specific content, threat models, or agent-centric use cases; primarily addresses traditional enterprise security.",
  "c": [
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft argues NETCONF's limitations in AI-driven network management and proposes MCP and A2A as complementary protocols for semantic translation, cross-domain orchestration, and multi-agent consensus. It provides a gap analysis and coexistence models but lacks detailed protocol specifications or implementation evidence.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental positioning work identifying NETCONF gaps and suggesting existing/emerging protocols (MCP, A2A) as solutions; the core concepts are not novel but the applicability framing to network ops is somewhat useful.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage problem statement with abstract solutions; lacks detailed protocol definitions, formal semantics, reference implementations, or interoperability examples. Reads as a motivational position paper rather than a specification.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing work: MCP is an external protocol (Anthropic), A2A is underspecified in literature, and agent-based network orchestration frameworks already exist. The draft is primarily a literature positioning rather than novel synthesis.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision, no evidence of WG adoption or community discussion. The draft appears to be an initial exploratory submission without follow-on development signals or vendor commitment.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to autonomous network operations and agent-to-agent interaction in network management; addresses real operational pain points where traditional config protocols fall short, though execution is immature.",
  "c": [
    "Autonomous netops",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent discovery/reg"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft extends AGTP with X.509 certificate binding for agent identity headers, enabling cryptographic verification of Agent-ID, Principal-ID, and Authority-Scope at the transport layer. It adds session revocation via NOTIFY broadcast and Certificate Transparency logging for governance metadata verification without application-layer access.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Straightforward application of existing PKI patterns (X.509 v3, mutual TLS, CT logs) to agent protocol headers; incremental engineering rather than novel cryptographic or architectural contribution.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-scoped specification with defined certificate extension, NOTIFY mechanism, and revocation propagation; appears implementation-ready but lacks test vectors, formal threat model, or reference implementation details.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Overlaps with standard mTLS identity binding, PKIX certificate extensions, and CT log concepts; distinguishes itself via AGTP-specific header binding and O(1) verification claim, but not substantially novel compared to similar mutual auth specs.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single dated revision (2026-03-23); no evidence of WG adoption, community discussion, or iterative refinement; pending patent claims may signal early-stage thinking or licensing friction.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses agent identity authentication and authority enforcement for agent-to-agent protocols; core infrastructure concern for trustworthy multi-agent systems, though framed narrowly around AGTP rather than broader agent ecosystem.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes an AI Agent Policy-Aware Network paradigm that shifts from flow-aware to agent-aware networking, enabling dynamic mapping between agent intents and network policies. Addresses collaborative scenarios including performance measurement, path optimization, and SLA assurance for AI agent workloads.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Incremental extension of intent-based networking concepts to AI agents; applies existing policy and QoS frameworks to emerging agent coordination needs rather than introducing fundamentally new mechanisms.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage use case document lacking protocol specifications, architectural details, or implementation examples; provides conceptual framework but no concrete mechanisms, data models, or interface definitions.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares foundational concepts with intent-based networking (IBN), network policy frameworks, and AI orchestration work; overlaps with existing multi-domain orchestration and agent management literature without clearly differentiating contributions.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single revision dated 2026; no apparent WG sponsorship or prior related submissions; limited evidence of community discussion or iterative development.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses emerging AI agent networking challenges and collaboration scenarios; timely for growing agent deployments but scoped to networking aspects rather than core agent capabilities.",
  "c": [
    "Policy/governance",
    "A2A protocols",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Data formats/interop"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "IntelliNode proposes in-network intelligent scheduling for AI training/inference by integrating FPGAs with programmable switches to enable real-time tensor-aware path selection and compute matching. It extends the CATS framework with a closed-loop perception-inference-decision-execution architecture that bypasses traditional controller-based scheduling.",
  "n": 4,
  "nn": "Genuinely novel approach combining in-network computing (FPGA+ASIC) with lightweight ML models for closed-loop network scheduling; tensor semantics awareness in data plane is non-obvious contribution beyond standard CATS extensions.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch phase: abstract describes vision and four functional layers but lacks protocol details, message formats, or implementation specifics; 6 pages insufficient for actionable specification.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares foundational concepts with CATS and in-network computing proposals (INT, P4 analytics); tensor-aware scheduling overlaps with ongoing ML systems networking work; closed-loop architecture not entirely novel but application here is differentiated.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single submission (2026-03-02); no evidence of WG adoption, prior versions, or community feedback; no implementation or deployment signals visible.",
  "r": 5,
  "rn": "Directly addresses core AI infrastructure challenge: distributed training/inference scheduling and resource utilization; tensor semantics and heterogeneous compute awareness are essential for next-gen AI systems.",
  "c": [
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Model serving/inference",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Data formats/interop"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "HTTPA/2 proposes an HTTP extension enabling trusted communication through Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs) and remote attestation, designed to operate independently of TLS. The protocol treats TEE services as Internet resources, allowing clients to verify the trustworthiness of server environments and protected functions.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental extension combining existing concepts (HTTP, TEE attestation, remote attestation) without fundamental innovation in the core mechanisms themselves.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage draft with conceptual definitions but lacking detailed protocol specifications, message formats, cryptographic procedures, and implementation guidance necessary for protocol maturity.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing TEE attestation frameworks (Intel SGX attestation, ARM CCA), remote attestation standards, and HTTP extension mechanisms; limited differentiation from prior HTTPA/1 work.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision as of 2024-05-07 with no apparent subsequent updates, limited evidence of WG adoption, community discussion, or implementation activity.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to AI agent topics; attestation and TEE security are relevant infrastructure for agent trust/authentication but not core to AI agent protocols, training, or deployment.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Other AI/agent"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Early-stage draft examining how AI agents impact network infrastructure and proposing standardization discussions within IETF. Limited technical depth with focus on problem space rather than concrete solutions or protocols.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental topic framing; AI impact on networks is recognized but the draft lacks novel technical insights or proposed mechanisms beyond general problem discussion.",
  "m": 1,
  "mn": "Problem statement phase only; no defined protocols, mechanisms, or specifications presented. Abstract indicates discussion/analysis intent without concrete technical proposals.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with existing work on network management, ML traffic patterns, and infrastructure impacts; not a unique technical approach but framing of known challenges.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Appears to be early draft (Jan 2026) with limited revision history visible. Single submission suggests nascent development without established working group momentum.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI agents; focuses on infrastructure impact rather than core agent communication, autonomy, or interoperability protocols. Tangential to mainstream agent standardization topics.",
  "c": ["Autonomous netops", "Policy/governance", "ML traffic mgmt", "Other AI/agent"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "ATP proposes a DAG-based protocol for creating cryptographically verifiable transaction records across agent systems, enabling tamper-evident causality and auditable lineage. The design emphasizes lightweight, transport-agnostic accountability suitable for environments requiring provenance tracking.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "DAG-based transaction logging with cryptographic verification is an incremental combination of established patterns (merkle DAGs, signed transactions, audit logs). Core concepts exist in blockchain/IPFS/git; application to agent systems is derivative.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol mechanics are defined with clear abstractions (signed nodes, parent references, DAG structure), but draft lacks implementation details, serialization formats, concrete test vectors, or reference implementations needed for interoperability validation.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with W3C Verifiable Credentials (signed claims), COSE (cryptographic object signing), git commit DAGs, and blockchain audit trails. The agent-specific framing is novel but underlying primitives are well-trodden.",
  "m": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision with May 2026 date suggests early-stage draft. No evidence of WG discussion, adoption signals, or competing proposals in related venues (IETF agent extensions, W3C agent track).",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI agent infrastructure (accountability, multi-agent coordination auditing). However, framed as generic transaction protocol rather than agent-specific; missing agent-relevant scenarios (policy compliance, capability delegation, LLM output attribution).",
  "c": ["A2A protocols", "Agent identity/auth", "Data formats/interop", "Policy/governance", "Autonomous netops"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft establishes standardized terminology for benchmarking LLM inference serving systems, defining shared vocabulary for latency, throughput, resource utilization, and quality metrics across inference engines and agentic systems. It provides definitional groundwork without prescribing specific methodologies or thresholds.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Terminology standardization is incremental; while useful, similar efforts exist in ML/systems communities (MLPerf, etc.). The focus on LLM-specific agentic serving contexts adds modest specificity.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-structured terminology document with 54 pages suggesting comprehensive definitions, examples, and organized sections. Lacks implementation artifacts but maturity appropriate for a standards terminology draft.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with MLPerf benchmarking taxonomy, existing inference serving metrics (vLLM, TensorRT), and general systems performance terminology. Limited differentiation from prior ML performance standardization efforts.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single dated revision (2026-01-20); no evidence of WG adoption, multiple iterations, or community engagement. Appears to be initial individual submission with minimal momentum.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to model serving/inference infrastructure, which is foundational for AI agents. Moderately relevant to broader agent deployments requiring performance characterization across system layers.",
  "c": [
    "Model serving/inference",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "This draft examines network and system design considerations for deploying AI inference services across distributed architectures, including cloud-edge hybrid deployments and use cases like autonomous vehicles and digital twins.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental compilation of known deployment patterns; lacks novel architectural or networking insights specific to AI workloads",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage position paper without defined mechanisms, protocols, or technical specifications; reads as exploratory requirements document rather than actionable guidance",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing IETF work on edge computing (MEC), distributed ML inference, and network slicing; limited differentiation from parallel standardization efforts",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single revision with no evidence of WG adoption or iterative refinement; appears to be exploratory submission without sustained community engagement",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI deployment but lacks focus on agent-specific concerns; addresses ML inference infrastructure rather than autonomous agent orchestration or decision-making",
  "c": [
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Model serving/inference",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "AGIS proposes a grammar-constrained interface definition language for LLM-based agents that uses intent-expressing imperative verbs as method identifiers, enabling agents to infer operational meaning without predefined catalogs. It serves as the native interface layer for the Agent Transfer Protocol (AGTP) and claims empirical validation showing 10-29 percentage point accuracy advantages over generic HTTP verbs.",
  "n": 3,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution leveraging known concepts (grammar constraints, semantic method naming, intent inference) in a novel combination for agent APIs; the core insight about naming conventions improving LLM comprehension is useful but not groundbreaking.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-structured specification with normative serialization formats (YAML/JSON), semantic declaration enhancements, and HTTP bridging. Appears implementation-ready but abstract and draft status suggests incomplete validation; test vectors not mentioned.",
  "o": 3,
  "on": "Shares conceptual overlap with OpenAPI/AsyncAPI for interface definition, JSON Schema for data contracts, and general intent-based API design patterns; positioned as complementary rather than replacement but occupies similar design space.",
  "mo": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft dated 2026-04-17 with no revision history visible; referenced empirical work [HOOD2026] suggests author investment but no indication of WG adoption, multiple implementations, or community feedback cycles.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent standardization; addresses real problem of agent-API interaction efficiency. Relevance diminished slightly by narrow focus on LLM comprehension metrics rather than broader agent autonomy/safety considerations.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Model serving/inference"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes using LISP's control plane mechanisms to manage AI infrastructure networking, enabling unified handling of scale-up, scale-out, and scale-across backend networks. Leverages LISP's EID-to-RLOC mapping and VPN segmentation to provide scalable bandwidth, low-latency collective operations, and simplified control across heterogeneous accelerator fabrics for AI/ML workloads.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental application of existing LISP mechanisms to AI infrastructure; combines known LISP features (mapping, segmentation, multi-site) without introducing novel networking primitives or fundamentally new approaches to AI-specific network challenges.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage; abstract describes vision and references existing RFCs but provides minimal detail on architecture, deployment specifics, protocol modifications, or validation. No indication of implementation status or test results in the 23-page document preview.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing LISP deployments and datacenter network designs; the concepts of multi-site LISP, VPN segmentation, and control plane separation are well-established. Similar problems addressed by other fabric approaches (e.g., RoCE, InfiniBand overlays).",
  "m": 1,
  "mon": "Limited momentum indicators visible; appears to be early-stage submission with no apparent WG adoption, follow-up revisions, or community discussion signals based on metadata.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to AI infrastructure but focuses on networking layer rather than AI agents, safety, model serving, or autonomous operations. Addresses ML traffic management and infrastructure concerns tangentially.",
  "c": [
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Other AI/agent"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes using TPM-based hardware attestation in email headers to verify sender legitimacy and prevent spam, with both direct CA verification and privacy-preserving SD-JWT variants. Aims to make large-scale spam economically infeasible by requiring unique physical security chips per sender.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental combination of existing technologies (TPM attestation, CMS, SD-JWT) applied to email; the core insight of binding email to hardware is straightforward, though the specific header encoding is new.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Protocol mechanism is reasonably well-specified with attestation formats defined, but lacks implementation details, test vectors, deployment considerations, and empirical validation of spam reduction claims.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with DKIM/DMARC/ARC email authentication efforts, existing TPM attestation standards (TCG), and remote attestation RFCs; the novelty is primarily in combining these for email rather than developing new primitives.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft publication (2026-02-20), no evidence of WG discussion, community adoption, or multiple revisions; no apparent momentum in IETF processes or operational deployment interest.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to AI agents; while Sybil-resistance could theoretically help with AI-generated spam detection, the draft is fundamentally about email authentication and does not address agent behavior, coordination, or safety concerns.",
  "c": [
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a cryptographic verification standard (VRO) for attesting agentic AI governance compliance in regulated industries across eight control areas and three maturity levels. Aims to provide deterministic, auditor-grade attestations that bridge the gap between existing frameworks like ISO/IEC 42001 and NIST AI RMF.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Combines existing governance frameworks with cryptographic attestation mechanics; the core concept of verified governance artifacts is incremental rather than conceptually novel.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Abstract describes objectives and high-level architecture (VRO, issuing-partner framework, control areas) but 13 pages likely insufficient for detailed protocol specification, cryptographic primitives, or implementation guidance.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with ISO/IEC 42001, NIST AI RMF, and audit/compliance frameworks; adds cryptographic layer but positioning as 'beneath' existing standards suggests derivative rather than novel approach.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft dated 2026-05-15 with no evidence of WG traction, revisions, or community discussion; appears to be initial submission without momentum indicators.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly addresses AI governance and agent compliance verification in regulated contexts; highly relevant to policy/governance and agent identity/auth domains.",
  "c": [
    "Policy/governance",
    "Agent identity/auth",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "AI safety/alignment"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a high-elasticity data express architecture for IP networks to support massive wide-area data transmission for AI and supercomputing workloads, implementing a 'one low and three high' technical system for differentiated services.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing IP network concepts (statistical multiplexing, elasticity) with data express service framing; lacks specific technical novelty in mechanisms or protocols.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage with reference architecture proposal but minimal technical depth; no detailed protocol specifications, implementation details, or validation presented in 7 pages.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing work on software-defined networking, network slicing, traffic engineering, and quality-of-service frameworks; conceptually similar to established data center networking solutions.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single submission with no apparent WG discussion, revisions, or community engagement; appears to be initial draft without adoption signals.",
  "r": 2,
  "rn": "Tangentially related to AI infrastructure needs but focuses on network transport layer rather than agent-specific protocols, behaviors, or coordination mechanisms; AI is motivation rather than core subject.",
  "c": [
    "ML traffic mgmt",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Policy/governance"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "µACP is a lightweight messaging protocol designed for autonomous agents on resource-constrained IoT/Edge devices, featuring deterministic memory bounds, fixed headers, and mandatory OSCORE security. It targets finite-state coordination patterns while guaranteeing bounded resource consumption on Class 1-2 devices.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining established patterns (TLV extensibility, fixed headers, OSCORE binding) without significant novelty; resource-constrained protocol design is well-trodden ground.",
  "m": 4,
  "mn": "Well-specified protocol with detailed message types, header format, and security requirements; appears implementation-ready but lacks test vectors, interop examples, or reference implementations.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with CoAP (fixed headers, TLV, OSCORE), MQTT-SN (lightweight messaging), and other constrained-device protocols; positioning relative to existing standards unclear.",
  "m": 2,
  "mon": "Single draft revision (2026-01-17), no evidence of WG adoption, community discussion, or implementation feedback; appears early-stage despite mature specification.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to agent communication but not specifically about AI agent behavior, safety, or intelligence; focuses on transport layer rather than agent semantics or coordination logic.",
  "c": ["A2A protocols", "Data formats/interop", "Agent identity/auth"]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a hierarchical dual-gate safety framework for autonomous AI agents combining deterministic pattern matching with a context-free LLM judge to prevent adversarial manipulation. Addresses the core problem that single LLMs cannot reliably enforce their own safety rules under pressure through architectural separation of reasoning and judging functions.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing safety concepts (denylists, LLM judges, layered architecture). The separation of judge from agent reasoning is sensible but not fundamentally novel; similar isolation principles appear in prior safety literature.",
  "m": 3,
  "mn": "Defined protocol with component specifications and conflict resolution rules, but lacks implementation examples, test vectors, and validation methodology. Appears protocol-ready for specification but not yet implementation-ready.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing AI safety literature on model jailbreak prevention, constitutional AI judges, and defense-in-depth architectures. The dual-gate concept echoes prior work on cascade filtering and constitutional filtering approaches.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "No evidence of community adoption, WG discussion, or follow-up revisions. Single draft with future publication date suggests nascent stage with minimal momentum in the IETF ecosystem.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to AI agent safety and autonomous systems, though framed as IETF-style specification rather than pure research. Addresses real concerns in deployed agent systems but positioned as protocol rather than architectural guidance.",
  "c": [
    "AI safety/alignment",
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Policy/governance",
    "Human-agent interaction"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes a networking framework for agent systems in enterprise and broadband environments, defining core components and interactions. Addresses the infrastructure requirements for autonomous agents operating in networked settings.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution; applies existing networking concepts to agent systems without introducing fundamentally novel architectural patterns or protocols.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early-stage framework document; lacks concrete protocol specifications, implementation details, or technical depth beyond component definitions.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant overlap with existing SDN/service mesh architectures, IoT frameworks, and autonomous system management literature; limited differentiation from prior work.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Limited revision history and no evident WG sponsorship or community adoption signals; appears as exploratory draft without sustained development trajectory.",
  "r": 3,
  "rn": "Partially relevant to agent networking but focuses on infrastructure plumbing rather than AI agent autonomy, decision-making, or intelligence aspects; more networking operations than AI-centric.",
  "c": [
    "Autonomous netops",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Other AI/agent"
  ]
}
```


```json
{
  "s": "Proposes IoA Protocol for distributed heterogeneous agent collaboration with layered architecture and extensible messaging. Targets 6G scenarios including intelligent transportation and human-AI teaming with support for dynamic team formation and adaptive task coordination.",
  "n": 2,
  "nn": "Incremental contribution combining existing agent communication patterns; lacks technical differentiation from FIPA, ROS, or emerging multi-agent frameworks.",
  "m": 2,
  "mn": "Early sketch stage; abstract describes vision but 13 pages insufficient for protocol specification detail, message formats, or implementation guidance.",
  "o": 4,
  "on": "Significant conceptual overlap with FIPA agent protocols, ROS communication layers, and recent multi-agent LLM frameworks (AutoGPT, CrewAI architectures); positioning unclear.",
  "mo": 1,
  "mon": "Single draft submission with 2025 date; no evident working group engagement, revisions, or community discussion activity detected.",
  "r": 4,
  "rn": "Directly relevant to agent collaboration and interoperability; strong fit for emerging AI/agent systems but lacks implementation evidence or standards adoption pathway.",
  "c": [
    "A2A protocols",
    "Data formats/interop",
    "Agent discovery/reg",
    "Human-agent interaction",
    "Autonomous netops"
  ]
}
```