%% You should probably cite draft-kott-numina-pair-binding-02 instead of this revision.
@techreport{kott-numina-pair-binding-01,
    number =    {draft-kott-numina-pair-binding-01},
    type =      {Internet-Draft},
    institution =   {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    note =      {Work in Progress},
    url =       {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kott-numina-pair-binding/01/},
    author =    {Samuel J. Kott},
    title =     {{An Evidence Preserving Companion Record for the fixed string numina.pair-binding.v1 / Ed25519: A design study of Ed25519; the universal pair binding model.}},
    pagetotal = 26,
    year =      ,
    month =     ,
    day =       ,
    abstract =  {Software attribution may need to be clarified after release artifacts and their cryptographic commitments have been fixed. Editing those artifacts would disturb the evidence that an attribution statement is intended to describe. This paper proposes a separately versioned companion record that associates two unchanged source commitments with explicit named attribution and an opaque reference to a private genesis record. The construction uses JSON Canonicalization Scheme (JCS) bytes, an application-specific message prefix, and pure Ed25519 signatures. Its verification model separates payload integrity, signing authority, source equality, revision freshness, and private reference resolution. A Numina example preserves two existing SHA-256 commitments and records an owner-defined person-to-alias map without treating labels as proof of authorship or mathematical derivation. Historical records report reproduction of both commitments. A later byte comparison establishes equality of the selected v155 inputs and hash profile, without establishing whole- source equality or a deployed signed binding. The contribution is a proposed evidence-preservation and reporting discipline, rather than a new cryptographic primitive. A public-safe record would require its own approved payload and signature. Trust provisioning, implementation tests, and public reproducibility remain open.},
}