An RDAP Profile for Agent Identifier Registration Data
draft-yu-agent-identifier-rdap-00
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 | Haisheng Yu | ||
| Last updated | 2026-05-22 | ||
| 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-yu-agent-identifier-rdap-00
Internet Engineering Task Force H. Yu
Internet-Draft China Internet Network Information Center
Intended status: Informational 20 May 2026
Expires: 21 November 2026
An RDAP Profile for Agent Identifier Registration Data
draft-yu-agent-identifier-rdap-00
Abstract
AI agents may need stable identifiers that are independent from their
current network locations. In agent deployments, an Agent identifier
may be associated with IPv6 locators, IPv6 prefixes, Agent Gateways,
public key references, policy references, lifecycle state, and
revocation status. Applications, gateways, controllers, and
operators need a trusted way to query this registration data.
This document defines an RDAP profile for querying Agent identifier
registration data. The profile reuses the Registration Data Access
Protocol (RDAP) query model and JSON response format, and defines an
RDAP object class and extension members for Agent identifiers, IPv6
locator bindings, Agent Gateway bindings, and related operational
metadata.
This document does not define a new agent discovery protocol, a new
agent interaction protocol, or a new authentication mechanism. It
defines a registration data access profile that can be used by agent
deployments and by other agent-related systems that need trusted
Agent identifier metadata.
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 21 November 2026.
Yu Expires 21 November 2026 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Agent Identifier RDAP May 2026
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.
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. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Scope and Non-Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. RDAP Extension Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Query Path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Agent RDAP Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. IPv6 Locator Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. Agent Gateway Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10. Example Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
11. Use with Agent Networking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
12. Conformance and Error Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
13. Relationship to Audit and Accountability . . . . . . . . . . 10
14. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
15. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
16. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
17. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
18. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Conventions Used in This Document
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.
Yu Expires 21 November 2026 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Agent Identifier RDAP May 2026
2. Introduction
AI agents are increasingly expected to interact across platforms,
organizations, clouds, edge environments, and administrative domains.
A stable Agent identifier can help identify an agent independently
from the agent's current network location. However, a relying party
may still need to know which entity is responsible for the Agent
identifier, whether the identifier is active, which IPv6 locators or
Agent Gateways are authorized to represent the agent, and whether a
binding has expired or been revoked.
The companion IPv6 networking considerations draft discusses what
networking information may be needed after agent discovery, including
Agent-ID to IPv6 locator or Agent Gateway binding. This document
explores one possible way to provide stable registration data for
Agent identifiers using RDAP.
RDAP provides a RESTful query model and JSON responses for
registration data [RFC7480] [RFC9082] [RFC9083]. Reusing RDAP allows
agent deployments to use an existing registration data access model
rather than defining a new query protocol.
3. Scope and Non-Goals
This document specifies:
* an RDAP object class for Agent identifiers;
* query paths for Agent identifier lookup;
* JSON members for Agent lifecycle state and responsible entity
references;
* JSON members for IPv6 locator and Agent Gateway bindings;
* JSON members for policy, certificate, validity, and revocation
metadata;
* security and privacy considerations for exposing Agent
registration data.
This document does not specify:
* a new Agent identifier syntax;
* a new agent discovery or collaboration protocol;
* a new authentication, authorization, or attestation protocol;
Yu Expires 21 November 2026 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Agent Identifier RDAP May 2026
* a mandatory global registry for all Agent identifiers;
* real-time presence, health, load, capability ranking, or endpoint
selection;
* a replacement for RDAP domain, nameserver, entity, autnum, or IP
network objects.
4. Terminology
Agent:
A software entity that can perceive context, reason, plan, invoke
tools, communicate with other agents, and perform tasks on behalf
of a user, organization, or system.
Agent Identifier:
A stable identifier used to identify an agent independently from
its current network location.
Agent Networking Considerations:
Considerations related to the use of IP networking mechanisms to
support agent communication after discovery.
Agent Gateway:
A network or application gateway that represents one or more
agents and provides controlled access, address mapping, policy
enforcement, protocol adaptation, or telemetry collection.
Agent Binding:
An association between an Agent identifier and one or more IPv6
locators, IPv6 prefixes, or Agent Gateways.
Agent RDAP Object:
An RDAP object representing registration data for an Agent
identifier.
5. RDAP Extension Identifier
RDAP responses that use the extensions defined in this document MUST
include the extension identifier "agent_identifier_rdap" in the
"rdapConformance" array.
{
"rdapConformance": [
"rdap_level_0",
"agent_identifier_rdap"
]
}
Yu Expires 21 November 2026 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Agent Identifier RDAP May 2026
The extension identifier is used provisionally in this version.
Future versions may request IANA registration if this approach
receives community interest.
6. Query Path
This profile defines the following RDAP query path for exact Agent
identifier lookup:
/agent/{agentIdentifier}
The "agentIdentifier" path component is the Agent identifier being
queried. The value MUST be percent-encoded when required by URI
syntax.
Servers MAY also support search paths in a future version. This
document defines only exact lookup.
7. Agent RDAP Object
An Agent RDAP Object is an RDAP response object that describes an
Agent identifier and related registration data. It reuses common
RDAP members such as "objectClassName", "handle", "entities",
"events", "links", "notices", and "remarks" as defined by RDAP.
The "objectClassName" member for an Agent RDAP Object MUST be
"agent".
The following agent-specific members are defined:
agentIdentifier:
The stable Agent identifier represented by this object.
agentStatus:
The lifecycle state of the Agent identifier or binding. Example
values include "active", "inactive", "suspended", "revoked", and
"expired".
responsibleEntity:
An RDAP entity handle, URI, or opaque reference identifying the
entity responsible for the Agent identifier.
agentDomains:
An array of administrative or operational domains associated with
the Agent identifier.
Yu Expires 21 November 2026 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Agent Identifier RDAP May 2026
ipv6Locators:
An array of IPv6 locator objects associated with the Agent
identifier.
agentGateways:
An array of Agent Gateway objects authorized to represent the
Agent identifier.
certificateRefs:
An array of certificate, key, or trust document references.
policyRefs:
An array of policy references associated with the Agent identifier
or binding.
revocationStatus:
Information about revocation state and revocation checking
endpoints.
8. IPv6 Locator Object
An IPv6 Locator Object describes an IPv6 address or prefix through
which an agent instance, service, or gateway can be reached.
The following members are defined:
locator:
An IPv6 address or prefix.
locatorType:
The type of locator. Example values include "instance",
"service", "gateway", and "prefix".
priority:
An integer used to express selection priority. Lower values
indicate higher preference.
weight:
An integer used for weighted selection among locators of equal
priority.
region:
A deployment region, availability zone, site, or other operational
location label.
validFrom:
The time from which this locator binding is valid.
Yu Expires 21 November 2026 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Agent Identifier RDAP May 2026
validUntil:
The time after which this locator binding is no longer valid.
status:
The status of the locator binding. Example values include
"active", "inactive", "revoked", and "expired".
9. Agent Gateway Object
An Agent Gateway Object describes a gateway that is authorized to
represent one or more Agent identifiers.
The following members are defined:
gatewayIdentifier:
A stable identifier for the Agent Gateway.
gatewayLocator:
An IPv6 address, IPv6 prefix, URI, or other locator used to reach
the gateway.
representedAgents:
An array of Agent identifier references or patterns represented by
the gateway.
authorizationRef:
A reference to authorization data showing that the gateway may
represent the Agent identifier.
policyRefs:
An array of policy references enforced by or associated with the
gateway.
status:
The status of the gateway binding.
10. Example Response
The following example shows an Agent RDAP Object for an agent that is
reachable through an Agent Gateway.
{
"rdapConformance": [
"rdap_level_0",
"agent_identifier_rdap"
],
"objectClassName": "agent",
"handle": "AGENT-EXAMPLE-0001",
Yu Expires 21 November 2026 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Agent Identifier RDAP May 2026
"agentIdentifier": "agent:warehouse.example.cn:agv-001",
"agentStatus": "active",
"responsibleEntity": "CNIC-EXAMPLE-ENTITY",
"agentDomains": [
"warehouse.example.cn"
],
"ipv6Locators": [
{
"locator": "2001:db8:100:20::1",
"locatorType": "gateway",
"priority": 100,
"weight": 100,
"region": "warehouse-site-a",
"validFrom": "2026-05-20T00:00:00Z",
"validUntil": "2026-11-20T00:00:00Z",
"status": "active"
}
],
"agentGateways": [
{
"gatewayIdentifier": "warehouse-gateway-001",
"gatewayLocator": "2001:db8:100:20::1",
"representedAgents": [
"agent:warehouse.example.cn:agv-001"
],
"authorizationRef": "https://example.net/agent/authz/warehouse-gw-001",
"policyRefs": [
"policy:warehouse-dispatch"
],
"status": "active"
}
],
"certificateRefs": [
"https://example.net/agent/certs/agv-001"
],
"policyRefs": [
"policy:warehouse-dispatch"
],
"revocationStatus": {
"status": "notRevoked",
"revocationCheck": "https://example.net/agent/status/agv-001"
},
"events": [
{
"eventAction": "registration",
"eventDate": "2026-05-20T00:00:00Z"
},
{
Yu Expires 21 November 2026 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Agent Identifier RDAP May 2026
"eventAction": "last changed",
"eventDate": "2026-05-20T00:00:00Z"
}
],
"links": [
{
"value": "https://rdap.example.net/agent/agent%3Awarehouse.example.cn%3Aagv-001",
"rel": "self",
"href": "https://rdap.example.net/agent/agent%3Awarehouse.example.cn%3Aagv-001",
"type": "application/rdap+json"
}
]
}
11. Use with Agent Networking
An agent networking implementation can use this RDAP profile to
verify Agent-ID binding data before selecting an IPv6 locator, Agent
Gateway, or network policy. For example, an Agent Gateway can query
the Agent RDAP Object to determine whether it is authorized to
represent a target Agent-ID. A controller can query the same object
to select a locator or policy for a given communication, such as an
SRv6 policy in a controlled domain.
This RDAP profile is not a real-time reachability protocol. It
provides registration data. Implementations that require live
reachability, health, or load information should combine this profile
with other mechanisms such as Agent registries, service discovery
systems, controllers, telemetry, or application-layer health checks.
Online/offline state, live load, health, capability ranking, and
endpoint selection are out of scope for this profile.
12. Conformance and Error Handling
Servers implementing this profile MUST follow RDAP transport and
response requirements. RDAP error responses, including status codes,
notices, and remarks, are used as defined by RDAP.
If the requested Agent identifier does not exist, the server SHOULD
return an RDAP not-found response. If the Agent identifier exists
but the client is not authorized to view the requested data, the
server SHOULD return an appropriate authorization error or a redacted
response according to local policy.
A server MAY return different field sets to different clients based
on authentication, authorization, local policy, and privacy
requirements. Clients MUST NOT assume that absence of a field means
absence of the corresponding registration data.
Yu Expires 21 November 2026 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Agent Identifier RDAP May 2026
13. Relationship to Audit and Accountability
Agent identifier registration data can be useful to audit and
accountability systems. For example, an audit record may contain an
Agent identifier and later need to determine the responsible entity,
lifecycle state, revocation state, authorized Agent Gateway, or
associated IPv6 locator for that identifier.
This profile can provide stable registration data that audit systems
may reference. It does not define audit records, distributed audit
log formats, audit context propagation, attestation evidence,
transparency logs, or non-repudiation mechanisms.
14. Security Considerations
Agent registration data can influence routing, gateway selection,
access control, and policy enforcement. Servers providing Agent RDAP
Objects MUST authenticate update operations and MUST ensure that an
Agent identifier cannot be bound to an unauthorized IPv6 locator or
Agent Gateway.
RDAP clients MUST use HTTPS as specified by RDAP over HTTP. Clients
MUST validate the server identity according to the applicable TLS
validation rules.
Agent Gateway authorization data is security-sensitive. A gateway
MUST NOT be treated as authorized to represent an Agent identifier
solely because it appears in an unauthenticated or stale response.
Implementations SHOULD check validity periods, revocation status, and
policy references before relying on gateway binding information.
Replay and stale-data attacks are possible if old registration data
is accepted after a binding has changed or been revoked. Servers
SHOULD include update events and validity intervals. Clients SHOULD
apply local freshness policies and re-query when cached data is
stale.
This profile does not define how Agent identifiers are created,
delegated, or cryptographically controlled. Deployments MUST define
the authority model used to issue and manage Agent identifiers.
15. Privacy Considerations
Agent RDAP Objects may reveal information about organizations,
internal deployments, gateways, network locations, operational
regions, policy names, and relationships between domains. Servers
SHOULD minimize disclosed data and apply access control where
appropriate.
Yu Expires 21 November 2026 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Agent Identifier RDAP May 2026
Some Agent identifiers may be pseudonymous or scoped to a domain.
Servers SHOULD avoid exposing unnecessary personally identifiable
information, user data, prompts, task descriptions, or sensitive
application payload information in Agent RDAP Objects.
Public RDAP responses and authenticated RDAP responses may have
different disclosure levels. Deployments SHOULD define which fields
are public and which require authorization.
16. IANA Considerations
This initial version does not request any IANA action.
Future versions may request registration of an RDAP extension
identifier if this approach receives community interest.
17. 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>.
[RFC7480] Newton, A., Ellacott, B., and N. Kong, "HTTP Usage in the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
RFC 7480, DOI 10.17487/RFC7480, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7480>.
[RFC9082] Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "Registration Data Access
Protocol (RDAP) Query Format", STD 95, RFC 9082,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9082, June 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9082>.
[RFC9083] Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "JSON Responses for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
RFC 9083, DOI 10.17487/RFC9083, June 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9083>.
18. Informative References
[RFC7482] Newton, A. and S. Hollenbeck, "Registration Data Access
Protocol (RDAP) Query Format", RFC 7482,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7482, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7482>.
Yu Expires 21 November 2026 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Agent Identifier RDAP May 2026
[RFC7483] Newton, A. and S. Hollenbeck, "JSON Responses for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", RFC 7483,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7483, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7483>.
[I-D.yu-ai-agent-ipv6-networking-considerations]
Yu, H., "IPv6 Networking Considerations for AI Agent
Communication", <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-
yu-ai-agent-ipv6-networking-considerations/>.
Author's Address
Haisheng Yu
China Internet Network Information Center
Email: yuhaisheng@cnnic.cn
Yu Expires 21 November 2026 [Page 12]