Substrate-Provenance Annotation Grammar for Large-Language-Model Output
draft-morrison-substrate-provenance-grammar-01
This document is an Internet-Draft (I-D).
Anyone may submit an I-D to the IETF.
This I-D is not endorsed by the IETF and has no formal standing in the
IETF standards process.
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (individual) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Blake Morrison | ||
| Last updated | 2026-08-11 | ||
| 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-morrison-substrate-provenance-grammar-01
Network Working Group B. Morrison
Internet-Draft Alter Meridian Pty Ltd
Intended status: Informational 9 August 2026
Expires: 10 February 2027
Substrate-Provenance Annotation Grammar for Large-Language-Model Output
draft-morrison-substrate-provenance-grammar-01
Abstract
This memo specifies a wire-level annotation grammar by which a large-
language-model output may carry, at emission and at the granularity
of an individual assertion, a provenance label drawn from a closed
enumerated vocabulary of substrate-class identifiers. The memo
defines the closed vocabulary, the per-assertion attachment form, the
admissibility discipline a relying party MAY apply to the labels, and
two terminal output states, UNVERIFIED-INFERENCE and DECAYED-TO-
UNCERTAINTY, equal-rank with assertion and denial. The memo does not
specify what an inference system MUST do; it specifies the wire
grammar by which a relying party may inspect what the inference
system DID with respect to the substrates it consulted. The memo is
Informational.
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 10 February 2027.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2026 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Substrate Provenance Grammar August 2026
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.
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
2. Conventions and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. The Closed Substrate-Class Vocabulary . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Terminal Annotations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Attachment Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Admissibility Discipline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Why the Vocabulary Is Closed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. Relation to Prior Art . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
10.1. Annotation Fabrication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
10.2. Vocabulary Drift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
10.3. Substrate Capture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
IPR Posture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Introduction
When a large-language-model output is consumed by another agent, by a
downstream automation, or by a relying party with action authority,
the consuming entity has no wire-level mechanism to distinguish three
structurally different cases: (i) the model emitted the assertion
from training-corpus-resident pattern without consulting any external
substrate; (ii) the model emitted the assertion after consulting an
external substrate whose state corroborated the assertion within an
admissibility window; (iii) the model emitted the assertion after
consulting an external substrate whose state did not corroborate the
assertion, and the model proceeded anyway.
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Substrate Provenance Grammar August 2026
Existing approaches to this problem operate at the prose layer: post-
hoc citation insertion by a separate retrieval orchestrator, natural-
language hedge phrasing ("I believe", "it appears", "according to"),
per-paragraph confidence scores rendered as adjectives, or refusal to
answer. All four are surface-form-parseable rather than structurally
distinguishable; all four can be defeated by a model trained to
substitute hedge phrasing for substrate consultation.
This memo specifies a wire-level grammar by which the inference
system declares, at the granularity of an individual assertion within
its output, which substrate-class, if any, corroborated the assertion
at emission. The grammar is closed-vocabulary, finite, and version-
anchored; the consuming entity parses the annotation without
interpreting prose. Two terminal annotations, UNVERIFIED-INFERENCE
and DECAYED-TO-UNCERTAINTY, are equal-rank with assertion and denial.
They are a structurally distinguishable output state, not a
confidence score and not a hedge phrase.
2. Conventions and Definitions
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.
The following terms are defined for the purposes of this document:
* *Assertion.* A token sequence in the inference system's output
that makes a truth-evaluable claim about state external to the
inference system itself.
* *Substrate.* A source of state that is structurally external to
the inference system, structurally non-writeable by the inference
system at consultation time, and structurally observable to a
relying party with independent access.
* *Substrate-class.* A named, version-anchored category of
substrate. A substrate-class identifier is an opaque string drawn
from the closed enumerated vocabulary of Section 3.
* *Provenance annotation.* A wire-level label attached to an
individual assertion that names the substrate-class corroborating
the assertion, or names one of the two terminal annotations
defined in Section 4.
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Substrate Provenance Grammar August 2026
* *Admissibility window.* A predicate, evaluated at assertion
emission time, that determines whether the corroborating
observation from a named substrate-class is recent enough to count
toward admission.
* *Cardinality-thresholded admissibility.* A discipline by which an
assertion is admitted to the inference system's output only if at
least _k_ corroborating observations from substrate-class-distinct
sources are available within the admissibility window, where _k_
is a relying-party-configurable floor.
3. The Closed Substrate-Class Vocabulary
The vocabulary defined by this memo is closed, finite, and version-
anchored. An implementation parsing a provenance annotation MUST
recognise the annotation if and only if the substrate-class
identifier appears in the version of the vocabulary the
implementation has loaded. Unknown substrate-class identifiers MUST
NOT be silently interpreted; an implementation that encounters one
MUST treat the annotation as if it were UNVERIFIED-INFERENCE
(Section 4).
The version-anchor scheme used by this memo is a dotted major.minor
pair appearing as a leading element of the substrate-class
identifier. The vocabulary defined in this revision of the memo
carries the version anchor 1.0. Future revisions of this memo MAY
add substrate-classes; addition is a minor-version bump. Future
revisions MUST NOT remove substrate-classes without a major-version
bump.
The version-1.0 closed substrate-class vocabulary:
* *substrate.git.log* The output of git log on a repository
observable to the relying party, with the assertion's content
appearing within a commit reachable from a named reference.
Compute-location: the relying party's local working tree or a
trusted mirror.
* *substrate.grep* The output of grep over a file-set observable to
the relying party, with the assertion's content appearing in a
named region of a named file. Compute-location: the relying
party's local file system.
* *substrate.code.read* The contents of a file at a specified path,
optionally with line offset and limit, as read from a file system
observable to the relying party. Compute-location: the relying
party's local file system.
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Substrate Provenance Grammar August 2026
* *substrate.fs.mtime* The modification timestamp of a file
observable to the relying party. Compute-location: the relying
party's local file system.
* *substrate.mcp.brief* The output of a query against a Model-
Context-Protocol-discoverable service per [MCPDNS] whose state is
owned by a party other than the inference system vendor. Compute-
location: the MCP service's own infrastructure.
* *substrate.do.sse-count* The numeric subscriber count on a server-
sent-event channel per [SUBOBS], observed by a relying party with
independent subscription to the same channel. Compute-location:
the SSE server's infrastructure.
* *substrate.unix.peercred* The kernel-reported peer credentials on
a Unix-domain socket connection, per [POSIX]. Compute-location:
the kernel of the host on which the observation is made.
* *unverified-inference* A sentinel substrate-class identifier
reserved for assertions emitted without corroboration from any
other substrate-class in this vocabulary. This is the terminal
annotation defined in Section 4; it is listed here for parser
completeness.
The eight identifiers above constitute the entirety of the version-
1.0 closed vocabulary.
4. Terminal Annotations
Two annotation values are terminal: they signal a structurally
distinguishable output state of the inference system, equal-rank with
assertion and denial, rather than corroboration by any substrate.
* *unverified-inference* The inference system emitted the assertion
without corroboration from any substrate-class in the vocabulary.
This is not a confidence score; it is the inference system's
declaration that the assertion is uncorroborated.
* *decayed-to-uncertainty* The inference system attempted to
corroborate the assertion from a substrate-class in the
vocabulary, but the observation aged beyond the admissibility
window before emission. This is not a confidence score; it is the
inference system's declaration that corroboration was attempted
and aged out.
Both terminal annotations are first-class output tokens. A relying
party parsing the wire output observes them in the same structural
slot in which substrate-class identifiers appear; the parser applies
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Substrate Provenance Grammar August 2026
the terminal-annotation disposition without inspecting prose. The
two terminal annotations are structurally distinct from refusal to
answer, from explicit denial, and from the absence of annotation.
5. Attachment Form
A provenance annotation is attached to an individual assertion in the
inference system's output. This memo specifies the abstract
attachment relationship; the concrete wire encoding is the
implementation's choice and is not normative herein.
The annotation form is the tuple:
(assertion-span, substrate-class-identifier, observation-id?, ts?)
where:
* *assertion-span* identifies the token sequence to which the
annotation applies (the implementation's choice of identifier:
character offsets, token offsets, structured-output field path, or
equivalent);
* *substrate-class-identifier* is drawn from the closed vocabulary
of Section 3 or is one of the terminal annotations of Section 4;
* *observation-id* (OPTIONAL) is a stable identifier for the
specific observation that corroborated the assertion, suitable for
re-querying the same substrate to confirm the binding;
* *ts* (OPTIONAL) is the time at which the corroborating observation
was made.
Two concrete encodings are illustrative and not normative:
JSON-structured-output encoding per [RFC8259]:
{
"assertion": "the file CHANGELOG.md contains an entry dated 2026-05-25",
"provenance": {
"substrate_class": "substrate.code.read",
"observation_id": "sha256:e3b0c4...",
"ts": "2026-05-28T11:40:00Z"
}
}
In-line bracketed annotation, for free-text outputs:
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Substrate Provenance Grammar August 2026
The file CHANGELOG.md contains an entry dated 2026-05-25.
[substrate.code.read; observation-id=sha256:e3b0c4...;
ts=2026-05-28T11:40:00Z]
6. Admissibility Discipline
A relying party MAY apply a cardinality-thresholded admissibility
discipline to inference system output annotated under this grammar.
The discipline is parameterised by:
* *k*, the floor cardinality of distinct substrate-classes required
to corroborate an assertion before the relying party admits the
assertion for downstream action.
* *W*, the admissibility window: a per-substrate-class duration
beyond which an observation is considered aged.
Reference values:
* k = 2 is the floor for assertions whose downstream effect is
bounded to the relying party's own state.
* k = 3 is the floor for assertions whose downstream effect affects
state external to the relying party (settlement, policy decision,
automated action with external visibility).
The relying party applies the discipline by counting, for each
assertion in the inference system's output, the distinct substrate-
class identifiers appearing in the assertion's provenance annotations
whose ts field is within W. Assertions not meeting the cardinality
floor are not admitted; assertions annotated with unverified-
inference or decayed-to-uncertainty are not admitted by virtue of the
terminal annotation itself.
A provenance annotation MUST NOT be counted toward the k = 3 floor
unless the relying party has independently re-verified it, per the
Annotation Fabrication discussion in Security Considerations.
Independent re-verification requires an observation-id; an annotation
lacking an observation-id MUST NOT be counted toward the k = 3 floor.
This requirement does not apply to the k = 2 floor, where an
annotation remains admissible under the counting procedure above
without independent re-verification.
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Substrate Provenance Grammar August 2026
Independent re-verification is only meaningful where re-querying the
named substrate can CONFIRM the earlier observation rather than
merely produce a second, unrelated one. A relying party MUST apply
that test per annotation before counting it toward the k = 3 floor,
and MUST NOT treat a later reading as confirming an earlier one where
the substrate's value may legitimately have changed in between, or
where the observed condition no longer exists to be queried.
substrate.do.sse-count, whose subscriber count legitimately differs
on every observation, and substrate.unix.peercred, which is
unavailable once the connection it described has closed, fail that
test in every case. substrate.mcp.brief names state owned by a third
party and may fail it depending on whether that state is stable
across the interval. The test is stated as a property rather than as
a list because the vocabulary is closed but the re-queryability of a
given observation is not a fixed attribute of its class.
An annotation that fails the test remains admissible toward k = 2.
This is a deliberate consequence rather than a defect in the
vocabulary, and it fails closed, but an implementer counting toward
the k = 3 floor needs to know that some annotations can never
contribute to it.
This memo does not specify what the relying party MUST do with an
inadmissible assertion. Common dispositions include: discarding the
assertion silently, surfacing it to a human reviewer, requesting re-
emission from the inference system, or substituting an explicit
refusal in the relying party's own output to the next consuming
entity. Each disposition is the relying party's own policy choice
and is not constrained by this memo.
7. Why the Vocabulary Is Closed
A reader may ask why the substrate-class vocabulary is closed rather
than open-extensible.
An open-extensible vocabulary would permit any inference system to
introduce a new substrate-class identifier and emit corroboration
annotations under it. A relying party encountering an unrecognised
identifier would face a choice: trust the new identifier on its face,
refuse the assertion, or treat the identifier as equivalent to a
fallback known identifier. Each choice is structurally inferior to
the closed-vocabulary posture of this memo:
* Trusting the unrecognised identifier on its face permits an
inference system to bypass the admissibility discipline by
inventing self-corroborating substrate-classes.
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Substrate Provenance Grammar August 2026
* Refusing the assertion stalls the consuming pipeline on a
vocabulary-version mismatch, an interop-combinatorics failure mode
shared with the envelope-coordination anti-pattern of [SUBOBS].
* Fallback-equivalence collapses the semantic distinctions the
vocabulary is intended to preserve.
The closed-vocabulary posture treats unrecognised identifiers as
unverified-inference (Section 4). This preserves the admissibility
discipline under vocabulary drift while leaving the relying party
free to upgrade its parser to a newer vocabulary version.
8. Relation to Prior Art
The contribution of this memo is the joint articulation of a closed
substrate-class vocabulary, per-assertion attachment, and two
terminal annotations as a single wire-level grammar. Each adjacent
prior-art family is structurally distinct from this grammar in at
least one of the three components:
Retrieval-Augmented Generation [RAG] performs retrieval against an
external corpus and conditions generation on the retrieved context.
RAG is an inference-system architecture; this memo specifies an
output-side annotation grammar. A RAG-architected inference system
MAY emit annotations under this grammar; a non-RAG inference system
MAY emit annotations under this grammar. The grammar is orthogonal
to the architecture.
Constitutional AI [CAI] and self-critique architectures apply a
second model pass to evaluate the first pass's output against a
specification. The output of such a system is not annotated at the
granularity of an individual assertion against an external substrate-
class; it is annotated, if at all, with a critique-pass verdict
against a specification authored by the model vendor. Annotation
against a vendor-authored specification is structurally distinct from
annotation against a substrate observable to a relying party.
Multi-agent debate [DEBATE] and related multi-pass deliberation
architectures produce a single consensus output from multiple agent
passes. The output's provenance is the agents' agreement process,
not a substrate observable to a relying party.
Hidden-state probing [PROBE] inspects the inference system's internal
activations to estimate the system's own confidence in its output.
Confidence is a property of the inference system; substrate-class
corroboration is a property of the relying party's own observation
surface. The two are categorically different information sources.
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Substrate Provenance Grammar August 2026
Cryptographically-anchored append-only logs (Certificate Transparency
[RFC6962], trusted timestamping per [RFC3161]) are candidate
corroborating substrates under this grammar, and each is a substrate-
class a future revision of the vocabulary MAY add. A chained log
considered in isolation is not a per-assertion annotation grammar.
9. IANA Considerations
This memo requires no IANA actions in its present revision. A future
revision may request establishment of an IANA registry for substrate-
class identifiers, governed by the closed-vocabulary discipline of
Sections 3 and 7.
10. Security Considerations
The grammar specified by this memo surfaces three classes of attack
absent from prose-only or hedge-phrasing approaches. The mitigations
described below are operational rather than wire-level; this memo
specifies the grammar only, and an implementation's operational
posture is its own.
10.1. Annotation Fabrication
An inference system may emit a provenance annotation citing a
substrate-class corroboration that did not in fact occur. The
grammar specified by this memo provides no cryptographic binding
between the annotation and any observed substrate state. A relying
party MUST NOT treat the annotation as evidence of corroboration; the
annotation is a declaration of the inference system's claim about its
own behaviour, which the relying party MAY independently verify by
re-querying the named substrate with the optional observation-id.
Cryptographic binding of annotations to observed substrate state is
out of scope for this memo and is the subject of separate work.
Admissibility Discipline requires this independent re-verification
before a provenance annotation may be counted toward the k = 3 floor;
the MAY above is the relying party's general option to verify any
annotation, and is superseded, for that floor, by the MUST stated
there.
10.2. Vocabulary Drift
An inference system implemented against a newer version of the
vocabulary may emit substrate-class identifiers not present in a
relying party's older vocabulary. Per Section 3, the relying party
treats unrecognised identifiers as unverified-inference. This is a
fail-closed posture and is correct. A relying party operating at a
substantially older vocabulary version SHOULD upgrade its parser to
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Substrate Provenance Grammar August 2026
the current published version of this memo.
10.3. Substrate Capture
An adversary controlling a substrate identified in the vocabulary may
engineer the substrate's state to corroborate assertions of the
adversary's choice. The admissibility discipline of Section 6, with
k = 2 or k = 3, mitigates this by requiring corroboration from
substrate-class-distinct sources before admission. An adversary
controlling all k substrate-classes can defeat the discipline;
selection of independent substrate-classes is the relying party's
operational responsibility and is not specified by this memo.
11. Privacy Considerations
Provenance annotations expose to consumers of the inference system's
output the categories of substrate the inference system consulted.
In typical deployments, the substrate-class identifier is a category
not a record; the per-record observation-id, if emitted, may carry
the privacy properties of the underlying substrate (a filesystem
path, a content hash, a peer credential identifier).
A relying party emitting annotations under this grammar to a further
downstream consumer SHOULD apply the same identity-binding
considerations articulated in [SUBOBS] for substrate observables:
pseudonymous tier observations need not carry strong identifiers;
identity-bound tier observations carry the identity-binding strength
of the underlying substrate.
The grammar specified by this memo does not require, and does not
recommend, attachment of identifiers tying the inference system's
output to a particular human end-user. Such attachments, if made,
are outside the scope of this memo.
12. References
12.1. 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>.
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Substrate Provenance Grammar August 2026
[RFC8259] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259>.
[SUBOBS] Morrison, B., "Substrate-Observation as an Alternative to
Envelope Coordination for Concurrent Sessions", 2026,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-morrison-
substrate-observation/>.
[MCPDNS] Morrison, B., "Discovery of Model Context Protocol Servers
via DNS TXT Records", 2026,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-morrison-mcp-dns-
discovery/>.
[IDCOMMITS]
Morrison, B., "Identity-Attributed Git Commits via Tier-
Structured Trailers", 2026,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-morrison-identity-
attributed-commits/>.
[IDPRONOUNS]
Morrison, B., "Identity Pronouns: A Reference-Axis
Extension to ~handle Identity Systems", 2026,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-morrison-identity-
pronouns/>.
12.2. Informative References
[RFC6962] Laurie, B., Langley, A., and E. Kasper, "Certificate
Transparency", RFC 6962, DOI 10.17487/RFC6962, June 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6962>.
[RFC3161] Adams, C., Cain, P., Pinkas, D., and R. Zuccherato,
"Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Time-Stamp
Protocol (TSP)", RFC 3161, DOI 10.17487/RFC3161, August
2001, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3161>.
[POSIX] "IEEE Std 1003.1-2017, Standard for Information Technology
- Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX) Base
Specifications", 2017,
<https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/>.
[RAG] Lewis, P., Perez, E., and A. Piktus, "Retrieval-Augmented
Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks", 2020,
<https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.11401>.
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Substrate Provenance Grammar August 2026
[CAI] Bai, Y., "Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI
Feedback", 2022, <https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.08073>.
[DEBATE] Irving, G., "AI Safety via Debate", 2018,
<https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.00899>.
[PROBE] Azaria, A. and T. Mitchell, "The Internal State of an LLM
Knows When It's Lying", 2023,
<https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.13734>.
Acknowledgements
This memo articulates a grammar layered above the substrate-
observation primitive of [SUBOBS], the identity substrate of
[IDPRONOUNS] and [IDCOMMITS], and the discovery mechanism of
[MCPDNS]. Its development is the joint product of deployed agentic-
system experience and structural analysis of adjacent prior art.
IPR Posture
The applicant of any patent rights that may be construed to read on
the grammar specified by this memo will file an IPR disclosure under
the IETF's standard procedures. The applicant's intended licensing
posture for any such rights is royalty-free with defensive-
termination, consistent with the applicant's published IPR
disclosures on companion memos in the morrison-* family.
Contributors
Author's Address
Blake Morrison
Alter Meridian Pty Ltd
Email: blake@truealter.com
Morrison Expires 10 February 2027 [Page 13]