Skip to main content

Internet Agent Communication Protocol - INTEROP
draft-gebauer-iacp-interop-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Author Leonard Gebauer
Last updated 2026-07-28
RFC stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-gebauer-iacp-interop-00
Network Working Group                                         L. Gebauer
Internet-Draft                                               Independent
Intended status: Informational                              28 July 2026
Expires: 29 January 2027

            Internet Agent Communication Protocol - INTEROP
                     draft-gebauer-iacp-interop-00

Abstract

   Ever since 1969 and the ARPANET, the internet has repeatedly been
   faced with challenges that it has had to overcome—and has overcome.
   Year after year, the number of users has grown, and year after year,
   the complexity and range of ways in which the internet can be used
   have expanded.  With the advent of AI, we not only have a new type of
   user, we have a different form of communication; the internet itself
   is being attributed a completely different significance.  If they are
   not already, AIs will make up the majority of internet users in the
   foreseeable future.  The question of an ‘AgentNet,’ is not merely a
   question concerning the internet; it is a question of how AIs will
   interact within a global network in the future.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 29 January 2027.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2026 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.

Gebauer                  Expires 29 January 2027                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft               IACP - INTEROP                    July 2026

   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.  Code Components
   extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Interoperability with other Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     2.1.  Interoperability with WIMSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
       2.1.1.  Trust Domain and Workload Identifier Mapping  . . . .   3
       2.1.2.  Transport of WIMSE Credentials  . . . . . . . . . . .   3
       2.1.3.  PSS as Transport for WIMSE Authentication . . . . . .   3
       2.1.4.  Gateway Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       2.1.5.  Trust Domain Discovery  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.2.  Interoperability with AGTP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.2.1.  IACP as Transport for AGTP Methods  . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.2.2.  AGTP Identity Document as Discovery Resource  . . . .   6
       2.2.3.  AGTP as the Method Layer over IACP  . . . . . . . . .   6
       2.2.4.  Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   3.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     3.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     3.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9

1.  Introduction

   This document is merely a sub-I-D of the main I-D.  For appendices,
   acknowledgments, Security Considerations, IANA Considerations and
   other information, please refer to the main I-D.  This sub-I-D
   contains only a 1:1 copy of the chapter it covers, to provide a
   better basis for discussion.

1.1.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

2.  Interoperability with other Protocols

Gebauer                  Expires 29 January 2027                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft               IACP - INTEROP                    July 2026

2.1.  Interoperability with WIMSE

   IACP and the WIMSE architecture [I-D.ietf-wimse-arch] address
   different layers of the workload communication stack.  WIMSE defines
   the architecture for workload identity and authentication, consisting
   of three building blocks: trust domain, workload identifier, and
   identity credentials [I-D.ietf-wimse-arch].  IACP provides the
   routing and transport layer for agent-to-agent communication.

2.1.1.  Trust Domain and Workload Identifier Mapping

   A WIMSE trust domain SHOULD be identified by a fully qualified domain
   name and maps to trust anchors for validating X.509 certificates and
   JWK Sets for validating Workload Identity Tokens (WITs)
   [I-D.ietf-wimse-arch].

   An IACP EID (Ephemeral Agent Identity) MAY be mapped to a WIMSE
   Workload Identifier [I-D.ietf-wimse-identifier].  The mapping is
   deployment-defined and MAY be published in the IACP DHT under KEY =
   SHA-256("wimse-map:" || Namespace).

2.1.2.  Transport of WIMSE Credentials

   IACP's Opaque Authorization Envelope (Section 5.7.2) MAY carry WIMSE
   credentials (Workload Identity Tokens or Workload Identity
   Certificates) as opaque byte arrays.  IACP does not interpret the
   internal structure of these credentials; it only guarantees
   authenticated delivery and cryptographic integrity of the envelope.

   For WIT validation, the verifier MUST validate the JWS signature and
   the cnf.jwk claim as defined in Section 5.1 of
   [I-D.ietf-wimse-workload-creds].  For WIC validation, the verifier
   MUST validate the X.509 certificate chain and verify that the
   certificate contains exactly one SubjectAltName extension of type URI
   as defined in Section 6.1 of [I-D.ietf-wimse-workload-creds].

   An IACP implementation that wishes to verify a carried WIT MAY call a
   WIMSE verifier on the envelope bytes, following the verification
   rules defined in [I-D.ietf-wimse-workload-creds].

2.1.3.  PSS as Transport for WIMSE Authentication

   IACP's Persistent State Sessions (PSS) MAY be used as the transport
   layer for WIMSE authentication mechanisms (WPT, HTTP Signatures, or
   mutual TLS).  The WIMSE authentication establishes the workload
   identity of the communicating parties; the IACP PSS provides the
   reliable, secure channel.

Gebauer                  Expires 29 January 2027                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft               IACP - INTEROP                    July 2026

   In this deployment model: - IACP handles session establishment,
   mobility, and fault tolerance - WIMSE handles workload identity
   authentication and credential validation

   For application-layer authentication, IACP MAY carry a WIT in the
   Workload-Identity-Token header for use with HTTP Message Signatures
   [I-D.ietf-wimse-http-signature].  For transport-layer authentication,
   IACP MAY carry a WIC for use with mTLS [I-D.ietf-wimse-mutual-tls].
   These bindings are deployment- specific and do not require changes to
   the core IACP specification.

   The combination provides both identity assurance and reliable
   communication.

2.1.4.  Gateway Integration

   WIMSE defines gateway services that MAY implement identity proxy
   functionality, including authentication, token exchange, and token
   transformation [I-D.ietf-wimse-arch].  IACP's Layer 7 Application
   Gateway (Section 5.7.2) MAY serve as such an identity proxy for WIMSE
   credentials, forwarding opaque authorization envelopes containing
   WITs or other WIMSE credentials without interpreting their internal
   structure.

2.1.5.  Trust Domain Discovery

   A WIMSE trust domain MAY publish its trust anchors for discovery
   using the mechanism defined in [I-D.schwenkschuster-wimse-trust-
   domain-discovery].  The mechanism defines a WIMSE Trust Bundle, a JWK
   Set document containing the trust anchors for both JWT-based (wimse-
   jwt) and X.509-based (wimse-x509) credentials, and a discovery
   endpoint at the well-known URI:

   https://<trust-domain>/.well-known/wimse-trust-domain

   An IACP relying party that receives a WIMSE credential from an
   unknown trust domain MAY perform discovery to obtain the trust
   anchors needed to validate the credential.  The discovery procedure
   follows Section 5.3 of [I-D.schwenkschuster-wimse-trust-domain-
   discovery].  Discovered trust anchors MUST NOT override locally
   provisioned trust anchors for the same trust domain.

Gebauer                  Expires 29 January 2027                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft               IACP - INTEROP                    July 2026

2.2.  Interoperability with AGTP

   AGTP [I-D.hood-independent-agtp] and IACP address different layers
   and concerns of the agent communication stack.  AGTP provides a
   dedicated application-layer protocol for AI agent traffic with native
   intent-based methods, a cryptographic identity model, and protocol-
   level observability and governance primitives.  IACP provides
   identity-locator separation, routing, mobility, and persistent
   sessions for agent-to-agent communication.

   The two protocols are complementary and MAY be composed in
   deployments that require both agent-native methods and robust routing
   and mobility support.

2.2.1.  IACP as Transport for AGTP Methods

   IACP's Persistent State Sessions (PSS) MAY be used as the transport
   layer for AGTP method invocations.  In this deployment model:

   *  The IACP PSS provides session continuity, mobility, and fault
      tolerance across network transitions (generation counting,
      MIGRATION_VECTOR, degraded multi-path routing).  AGTP uses port
      4480 by default [I-D.hood-independent-agtp].

   *  AGTP method invocations (QUERY, DISCOVER, DESCRIBE, EXECUTE,
      DELEGATE, ESCALATE, CONFIRM, SUSPEND, NOTIFY, and the Lifecycle
      methods ACTIVATE, DEACTIVATE, REINSTATE, REVOKE, and DEPRECATE)
      are carried as opaque payloads within IACP PSS_DATA_STREAM frames.

   *  The AGTP identity (Agent-ID) is a 256-bit value derived as SHA-256
      of the Agent Genesis in its canonical-form serialization (with the
      signature field excluded) [I-D.hood-independent-agtp,
      Section 7.5.2].  It is independent of the IACP EID (Ephemeral
      Agent Identity).

   *  A deployment MAY choose to map an IACP EID to an AGTP Agent-ID
      through a deployment-specific mapping.  Such mapping is out of
      scope for this document.

   The AGTP core method set consists of eighteen methods: cognitive
   methods (QUERY, DISCOVER, DESCRIBE, INSPECT, SUMMARIZE, PLAN,
   PROPOSE), mechanics methods (EXECUTE, DELEGATE, ESCALATE, CONFIRM,
   SUSPEND, NOTIFY), and lifecycle methods (ACTIVATE, DEACTIVATE,
   REINSTATE, REVOKE, DEPRECATE) [I-D.hood-independent- agtp,
   Section 8.1.1].

Gebauer                  Expires 29 January 2027                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft               IACP - INTEROP                    July 2026

2.2.2.  AGTP Identity Document as Discovery Resource

   AGTP defines an Agent Identity Document (application/vnd.agtp
   .identity+json) that is returned when an agtp:// URI is resolved
   [I-D.hood-independent-agtp].  An IACP agent that wishes to discover
   an AGTP-speaking agent MAY resolve the AGTP URI and retrieve the
   Agent Identity Document to learn the agent's capabilities, supported
   methods, verification tier, and authority scopes.

   The AGTP Agent Identity Document contains: - agent_id: the canonical
   AGTP Agent-ID (256-bit hex-encoded) - methods: the set of supported
   AGTP methods (from the eighteen- method floor or extended set) -
   verification_tier: the verification tier (1, 2, or 3) per [I-D.hood-
   independent-agtp, Section 7.1.9] - verification_path: the
   verification path used at activation (dns-anchored, log-anchored,
   hybrid, or org-asserted) - scopes_accepted: the authority scopes the
   agent accepts (domain:action format) - capabilities: higher-level
   service descriptors - trust_score: behavioral trust score on [0.0,
   1.0]

   IACP does not interpret the AGTP Identity Document; it is carried as
   an opaque resource.  The AGTP Identity Document MAY be retrieved via
   the IACP DHT if a deployment chooses to store it there, or it MAY be
   retrieved directly via AGTP URI resolution.

   AGTP defines three verification tiers for identity anchoring [I-
   D.hood-independent-agtp, Section 7.1.9]: - Tier 1 (Verified):
   identity anchored via one of three paths: dns-anchored (DNS TXT
   record), log-anchored (transparency log inclusion proof per RFC 9162/
   RFC 9943), or hybrid (DNS + blockchain signature combination) - Tier
   2 (Org-Asserted): organizational affiliation declared without
   cryptographic verification - Tier 3 (Experimental): development-only,
   not production-eligible

2.2.3.  AGTP as the Method Layer over IACP

   In a composed deployment, the following operational pattern applies:

   1.  The IACP EID Routing Protocol (ERP) establishes the agent's
       identity and network location.

   2.  An IACP Persistent State Session (PSS) is established between
       peers.

   3.  AGTP methods are invoked over the PSS channel.  The AGTP Agent-ID
       and Authority-Scope headers are carried alongside the IACP
       headers.

Gebauer                  Expires 29 January 2027                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft               IACP - INTEROP                    July 2026

   4.  IACP handles mobility and fault tolerance; AGTP handles the
       semantic method vocabulary and governance (Attribution-Record,
       Audit-ID, verification tiers).

   This composition allows agents to benefit from both IACP's routing
   and mobility capabilities and AGTP's intent-native method vocabulary
   and observability primitives.

   AGTP's Authority-Scope header uses the domain:action format (e.g.,
   documents:query, payments:confirm) [I-D.hood-independent- agtp,
   Appendix D].  When AGTP is composed over IACP, the Authority- Scope
   header is carried as part of the AGTP payload within the IACP
   PSS_DATA_STREAM frame.  IACP does not enforce AGTP authority scopes;
   enforcement remains at the AGTP layer.

2.2.4.  Deployment Considerations

   Deployments that compose IACP and AGTP SHOULD consider the following:

   *  Identity Mapping: If a deployment requires mapping between IACP
      EIDs and AGTP Agent-IDs, a deployment-specific mapping mechanism
      is required.  Such mapping is out of scope for both
      specifications.  The mapping MAY be published in the IACP DHT
      under KEY = SHA-256("agtp-map:" || Namespace) for discoverability.

   *  Session Continuity**: IACP PSS provides session continuity across
      network transitions.  AGTP method invocations carried over PSS
      benefit from this continuity without AGTP-level mobility
      mechanisms.

   *  Authority Scope: AGTP Authority-Scope headers are independent of
      IACP's authorization model.  A deployment MAY enforce both
      independently or define a mapping between them.  AGTP's Authority-
      Scope uses the domain:action format; IACP's authorization model is
      based on EID reputation and PoM.

   *  Governance: AGTP provides protocol-level observability and
      governance (Attribution-Record, Audit-ID, verification tiers,
      lifecycle methods ACTIVATE/DEACTIVATE/REVOKE/DEPRECATE).  IACP
      provides routing-level governance (EID reputation, PoM, 2PSE).
      The two governance models are complementary and MAY be used
      together in a composed deployment.

   *  Port and Transport: AGTP uses IANA-assigned port 4480 for both
      TCP/TLS and QUIC [I-D.hood-independent-agtp, Section 12.1].  When
      AGTP is composed over IACP, the AGTP messages are carried within
      IACP PSS_DATA_STREAM frames, and the underlying port is determined
      by the IACP transport configuration, not the AGTP port assignment.

Gebauer                  Expires 29 January 2027                [Page 7]
Internet-Draft               IACP - INTEROP                    July 2026

   *  Trust Tiers: AGTP's verification tiers (1, 2, 3) are independent
      of IACP's EID reputation system.  A deployment MAY use AGTP's
      verification_tier as an input to IACP's reputation calculations,
      but such integration is deployment-specific and out of scope for
      both specifications.

   *  Verification Paths: AGTP's verification_path field (dns-anchored,
      log-anchored, hybrid, org-asserted) provides evidence of how the
      agent's identity was anchored at activation time [I-D.hood-
      independent-agtp, Section 7.1.9].  This information MAY be used by
      IACP deployments to inform routing or policy decisions, but such
      use is deployment-specific.

   Interoperability with AGTP is OPTIONAL; IACP agents that do not
   support AGTP composition operate as specified in the core IACP
   specification.

3.  References

3.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

3.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-wimse-arch]
              Salowey, J., Rosomakho, Y., and H. Tschofenig, "Workload
              Identity in a Multi System Environment (WIMSE)
              Architecture", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
              ietf-wimse-arch-08, 6 July 2026,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-wimse-arch/>.

   [I-D.ietf-wimse-identifier]
              Rosomakho, Y. and J. Salowey, "Workload Identifier", Work
              in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-wimse-identifier-
              03, 6 July 2026, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-
              ietf-wimse-identifier/>.

   [I-D.ietf-wimse-workload-creds]
              Campbell, B., Salowey, J., Schwenkschuster, A., Sheffer,
              Y., and Y. Rosomakho, "WIMSE Workload Credentials", Work

Gebauer                  Expires 29 January 2027                [Page 8]
Internet-Draft               IACP - INTEROP                    July 2026

              in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-wimse-workload-
              creds-02, 2 July 2026, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/
              draft-ietf-wimse-workload-creds/>.

   [I-D.ietf-wimse-http-signature]
              Salowey, J. and Y. Sheffer, "WIMSE Workload-to-Workload
              Authentication with HTTP Signatures", Work in Progress,
              Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-wimse-http-signature-04, 6 July
              2026, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-wimse-
              http-signature/>.

   [I-D.ietf-wimse-mutual-tls]
              Salowey, J. and Y. Rosomakho, "Workload Authentication
              Using Mutual TLS", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
              draft-ietf-wimse-mutual-tls-02, 6 July 2026,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-wimse-mutual-
              tls/>.

   [I-D.schwenkschuster-wimse-trust-domain-discovery]
              Schwenkschuster, A. and Y. Rosomakho, "WIMSE Trust Domain
              Discovery", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
              schwenkschuster-wimse-trust-domain-discovery-00, 3 July
              2026, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-
              schwenkschuster-wimse-trust-domain-discovery/>.

   [I-D.hood-independent-agtp]
              Hood, C., "Agent Gateway Transport Protocol (AGTP)", Work
              in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-hood-independent-agtp,
              2026, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hood-
              independent-agtp/>.

Author's Address

   Leonard Gebauer
   Independent
   Germany
   Email: leonard.gebauer.ha@gmail.com

Gebauer                  Expires 29 January 2027                [Page 9]