<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!-- edited with XMLSPY v5 rel. 3 U (http://www.xmlspy.com)
     by Daniel M Kohn (private) -->
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!ENTITY rfc2119 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
]>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocompact="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="3"?>
<?rfc tocindent="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc comments="yes"?>
<?rfc inline="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<rfc category="std" docName="draft-li-dmsc-macp-03" ipr="trust200902">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="MACP">Multi-agent Collaboration Protocol Suites
    Architecture</title>

    <author fullname="Xueting Li" initials="X" surname="Li">
      <organization>China Telecom</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Beiqijia Town, Changping District</street>

          <city>Beijing</city>

          <region>Beijing</region>

          <code>102209</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <email>lixt2@foxmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Bing Liu" initials="B" surname="Liu">
      <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>No. 156 Beiqing Road</street>

          <city>Beijing</city>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <email>leo.liubing@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Jun Liu" initials="J" surname="Liu">
      <organization>Beijing University of Posts and
      Telecommunications</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>10 Xitucheng Road, Haidian District</street>

          <city>Beijing</city>

          <code>100876</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <email>liujun@bupt.edu.cn</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Chenguang Du" initials="C" surname="Du">
      <organization>Zhongguancun Laboratory</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city>Beijing</city>

          <code>100094</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <email>ducg@zgclab.edu.cn</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Lianhua Zhang" initials="L" surname="Zhang">
      <organization>AsiaInfo Technologies (China) Inc</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city>Beijing</city>

          <code>100000</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <email>zhanglh2@asiainfo.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date day="27" month="April" year="2026"/>

    <area>IETF Area</area>

    <workgroup>DMSC Working Group</workgroup>

    <keyword>Agent Gateway, Artificial Intelligence, Protocol Suites
    Architecture</keyword>

    <abstract>
      <t>This document defines a protocol suite and architectural framework
      for secure and scalable multi-agent collaboration. The proposed
      Multi-Agent Collaboration Protocol (MACP) enables trusted agent
      onboarding, capability-based discovery, distributed capability
      synchronization, and secure interaction among agents and external
      resources. The architecture introduces key entities such as the Agent
      Management Center (AMC), Agent Gateway (AGW), Agents, and External
      Resource Services (ERS), along with a set of protocols that collectively
      support dynamic, capability-driven collaboration across administrative
      domains.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section anchor="intro" title="Introduction">
      <t>The rapid evolution of large-scale multi-agent systems introduces new
      requirements for coordination, security, and service discovery across
      distributed environments. Agents are no longer confined to isolated
      execution contexts, but increasingly operate across administrative
      domains, network boundaries, and heterogeneous infrastructures. However,
      existing mechanisms for service interaction and discovery exhibit
      several limitations when applied to multi-agent collaboration:<list
          style="symbols">
          <t>Lack of unified trust establishment: Current agent interaction
          models often assume pre-established trust or rely on
          application-layer authentication, without a network-level mechanism
          to ensure that participating agents are authenticated, authorized,
          and accountable across domains.</t>

          <t>Insufficient capability abstraction and discoverability:
          Traditional service discovery mechanisms (e.g., DNS-based or
          registry-based approaches) focus on endpoint resolution rather than
          capability-oriented matching, making them unsuitable for dynamic
          agent collaboration where tasks are fulfilled based on functional
          capabilities rather than fixed service locations.</t>

          <t>Limited visibility across distributed environments: Existing
          systems lack a mechanism to construct a distributed, up-to-date view
          of available agent capabilities, especially when agents are
          registered under different control points or administrative
          domains.</t>

          <t>Inefficient or ad hoc discovery mechanisms: Without coordinated
          discovery strategies, agent systems rely on broadcast-like or
          centralized queries, leading to scalability challenges and increased
          latency in locating suitable collaborators.</t>

          <t>Fragmented protocol landscape: While protocols such as A2A, MCP,
          or other interaction mechanisms exist, they operate in isolation and
          do not provide an integrated framework for authentication,
          registration, discovery, and coordination.</t>
        </list></t>

      <t>These limitations become more critical as multi-agent systems scale,
      where dynamic task composition, cross-domain collaboration, and secure
      interaction are fundamental requirements. To address these challenges,
      this document proposes the Multi-Agent Collaboration Protocol (MACP), a
      protocol suite and architectural framework that:<list style="symbols">
          <t>Establishes a trusted onboarding mechanism via a centralized
          authentication and authorization entity</t>

          <t>Introduces capability-based abstraction and identification for
          agents</t>

          <t>Enables distributed capability synchronization across control
          points</t>

          <t>Supports both proactive and reactive discovery mechanisms</t>

          <t>Integrates existing interaction protocols into a cohesive
          collaboration framework</t>
        </list></t>

      <t>By shifting from endpoint-centric interaction to capability-driven
      collaboration, MACP enables scalable, secure, and flexible multi-agent
      systems that can operate effectively across heterogeneous and
      distributed environments.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Conventions used in this document">
      <t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
      "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
      document are to be interpreted as described in <xref target="RFC2119">
      </xref>.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Terminology">
      <t>The following terms are defined in this draft:<list style="symbols">
          <t>Agent: An automated intelligent entity capable of e.g interacting
          with its environment, acquiring contextual information, reasoning,
          self-learning, decision-making, executing tasks (autonomously or in
          collaboration with other Al Agents) to achieve a specific goal.</t>

          <t>Agent Gateway: The Agent Gateway is a functional entity that
          serves as the infrastructure for enabling interconnection and
          collaboration among agents. While its core role remains consistent,
          it is inherently flexible in deployment and can be realized in
          various forms&mdash;ranging from a network service to a dedicated
          gateway&mdash;depending on the architectural and operational
          requirements of different network environments.</t>

          <t>Agent Management Center (AMC): It is the trusted infrastructure
          service responsible for agent identity lifecycle management and
          credential issuance.</t>

          <t>Agent Identity Code (AIC): An Agent Identity Code (AIC) is a
          verifiable, globally unique identifier that represents the identity
          of an Agent.</t>

          <t>Agent Capability Specification (ACS): An Agent Capability
          Specification (ACS) is a structured description of an agent's
          capabilities and service information that can be stored, retrieved,
          and matched.</t>

          <t>Agent Credential: An Agent Credential is a tamper-resistant data
          object issued by an Agent Management Center(or its credential
          authority component), used by an Agent to prove identity attributes
          and/or authorization to a relying party. Examples include X.509
          certificates and security tokens.</t>

          <t>Agent Registration Protocol (ARP): The ARP governs how an agent
          formally registers with a locally attached agent gateway.</t>

          <t>Agent Authentication and Authorization Protocol (AAAP): The AAAP
          defines how authentication and authorization decisions are requested
          and enforced.</t>

          <t>Capability Directory Synchronization Protocol (CDSP): The CDSP
          synchronizes abstracted agent capability digests across agent
          gateways.</t>

          <t>Agent Discovery Protocol (ADP) : The ADP enables AGWs to locate
          agents that provide required capabilities, supporting both local and
          distributed discovery.</t>
        </list></t>
    </section>

    <section title="Multi-agent Collaboration Protocol Architecture">
      <t>The MACP architecture consists of the following key entities:, as
      shown in figure 1. Each functional entity represents a logical role in
      the IoA architecture, implementations MAY combine multiple entities into
      a single product.</t>

      <figure>
        <artwork><![CDATA[                                  +-----------------------+     
                                  |Agent Management Center|
                                  |   (Authentication &   |
                                  |    Authorization)     |
                                  +-----------------------+
                                    |  AAAP           |  AAAP
                                    |                 |
                    +-------------------+          +--------------------+
                    |   Agent Gateway 1 |          |  Agent Gateway 2   |
                    | + Registration    |----------| + Registration     |
                    | + Discovery       |   CDSP   | + Discovery        |
                    | + Capa Sync       |          | + Capa Sync        |
                    +--+-----+----------+          +--------+-----+-----+
                       |     |                              |     |
                 ARP   |     | ADP                    ARP   |     | ADP
                       |     |                              |     |
             +-----------------------+            +----------------------+        +-----------------+  
             |        Agent          |     A2A    |        Agent         |  MCP   |External Resource|
             |      (Role A)         |----------- |      (Role B)        |------- |  Service (ERS)  |
             +----------+------------+            +----------------------+        +-----------------+
                        |                                    | 
             +----------+------------+            +----------+------------+
             |         User A        |            |        User B         |
             +-----------------------+            +-----------------------+      

                          Figure 1 MACP Architecture Overview ]]></artwork>
      </figure>

      <section title="Agent Management Center">
        <t>The Agent Management Center is the trusted infrastructure service
        responsible for agent identity lifecycle management and credential
        issuance. The AMC provides centralized authentication and
        authorization services. It ensures that only legitimate and trusted
        agents are allowed to join the system. Specifically, the AMC:<list
            style="symbols">
            <t>Authenticates agent identity</t>

            <t>Determines authorization scope and execution permissions</t>

            <t>Issues authorization credentials (e.g., certificates or
            tokens)</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>Multiple Agent Management Center MAY exist in an IoA deployment,
        each managing a subset of agents within its administrative scope. A
        deployment MAY realize the identity management function and the
        credential authority function as separate services, provided they
        maintain consistent identity-to-credential binding.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Agent Gateway">
        <t>The Agent Gateway is a functional entity that serves as the
        infrastructure for enabling interconnection and collaboration among
        agents. While its core role remains consistent, it is inherently
        flexible in deployment and can be realized in various
        forms&mdash;ranging from a network service to a dedicated
        gateway&mdash;depending on the architectural and operational
        requirements of different network environments.</t>

        <t>The Agent Gateway provides the following functions:<list
            style="symbols">
            <t>Agent Registration: Maintains agent identity and capability
            information.</t>

            <t>Agent Capability Directory Management: Stores and organizes
            registered agent capabilities.</t>

            <t>Agent Capability Discovery: Supports both proactive and
            reactive agent discovery.</t>

            <t>Agent Capability Directory Synchronization: Exchanges agent
            capability digests with peer gateways.</t>

            <t>Agent Group Communication Support: Enables multi-agent
            coordination.</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>Each AGW maintains a local capability view and participates in
        forming a distributed capability knowledge plane. More specific
        requirements are specified in [draft-liu-dmsc-gw-requirements]<xref
        target="GW-REQ"/>.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Agent">
        <t>The Agent is an automated intelligent entity capable of e.g
        interacting with its environment, acquiring contextual information,
        reasoning, self-learning, decision-making, executing tasks
        (autonomously or in collaboration with other Al Agents) to achieve a
        specific goal.</t>

        <t>An Agent is responsible for: <list style="symbols">
            <t>Maintaining its own identity information (e.g., AIC) and
            credentials locally.</t>

            <t>Maintaining its capability description (e.g., ACS) and ensuring
            consistency with its current state.</t>

            <t>Performing authentication and authorization checks for
            interconnection, including mutual verification of peer agents and
            validation of presented credentials. - Conducting agent-to-agent
            interaction, including session establishment, message exchange,
            and task/context management.</t>

            <t>Accessing external resources when required to fulfill
            tasks.</t>

            <t>Producing monitoring and logging data for troubleshooting,
            auditing, and governance purposes.</t>
          </list>These are internal agent capabilities described here for
        informational purposes. They are NOT standardized as separate
        architectural functional components. In an interaction, an Agent MAY
        assume different roles depending on the collaboration mode. The DMSC
        architecture does not constrain the set of possible roles; specific
        collaboration protocols MAY define role semantics appropriate to their
        interaction patterns.</t>

        <t>For example, in a task-driven collaboration
        [draft-yang-dmsc-ioa-task-protocol] <xref
        target="draft-yang-dmsc-ioa-task-protocol"/>: <list style="symbols">
            <t>Leader: The Agent that initiates tasks and organizes
            collaboration.</t>

            <t>Partner: The Agent that accepts tasks and provides services,
            executing assigned tasks and returning results to the Leader.</t>
          </list>A single Agent implementation MAY act in different roles
        across different interactions. Role assignment is per-interaction, not
        per-deployment.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="External Resource Service (ERS) ">
        <t>The External Resource Service (ERS) represents external systems
        such as APIs, databases, or compute services that agents may invoke.
        ERS is conceptually external to the agent collaboration system and is
        accessed via existing protocols. </t>

        <t>ERS may include both domain-specific services and shared
        infrastructure services. In particular, certain ERS instances MAY
        correspond to widely deployed Internet-scale infrastructure (e.g.,
        naming, data access, or knowledge retrieval systems), which provide
        common capabilities that are not specific to agent collaboration but
        are essential for its operation. In this sense, ERS can be viewed as
        leveraging existing or future shared Internet service infrastructure,
        rather than replicating such functionality within the agent system
        itself.</t>

        <t>A key design principle is the separation of responsibilities
        between the agent collaboration system and ERS. The agent system is
        responsible for:<list style="symbols">
            <t> Agent identity, trust establishment, and authorization </t>

            <t>Agent capabilities registration, abstraction, and discovery
            </t>

            <t>Coordination and interaction among agents</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>In contrast, ERS is responsible for: <list style="symbols">
            <t>Providing external data, computation, or domain-specific
            functionality </t>

            <t>Supporting tasks that require capabilities beyond the agent
            system itself</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>Agents interact with ERS when executing tasks that require external
        resources, while core collaboration functions&mdash;such as discovery,
        routing, and coordination&mdash;remain within the agent system. The
        MACP architecture intentionally avoids redefining general-purpose
        Internet services (e.g., naming or data retrieval), and instead
        focuses on enabling agents to discover, select, and utilize such
        services in a coordinated manner.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Data Objects">
        <t>The following are protocol data objects referenced by the
        functional entities. They are not functional entities themselves:<list
            style="symbols">
            <t>Agent Identity Code (AIC): An Agent Identity Code (AIC) is a
            verifiable, globally unique identifier that represents the
            identity of an Agent. An AIC is allocated by an Agent Gateway
            during agent registration.</t>

            <t>Agent Capability Specification (ACS): An Agent Capability
            Specification (ACS) is a structured description of an agent's
            capabilities and service information that can be stored,
            retrieved, and matched. An ACS MAY use the JSON [RFC8259] <xref
            target="RFC8259"/> format, typically including: the agent's AIC,
            functional capabilities, technical characteristics, service
            interfaces, and security requirements.</t>

            <t>Agent Credential: An Agent Credential is a tamper-resistant
            data object issued by an AMC (or its credential authority
            component), used by an Agent to prove identity attributes and/or
            authorization to a relying party. Examples include X.509
            certificates and security tokens.</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>

      <section title="Entity Summary ">
        <t>The following table provides a summary of all functional entities
        and external actors in the simplified DMSC architecture.</t>

        <t><figure>
            <artwork><![CDATA[| #  | Entity                    | Type              | Role in Architecture                                  |
|----|---------------------------|-------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|
| 1  | Agent                     | Core entity       | Autonomous task execution and collaboration           |
| 2  | Agent Management Center   | Infrastructure    | Identity lifecycle management and credential issuance |
| 3  | Agent Gateway             | Infrastructure    | Capability directory,agent discovery, synchronization |
| 4  | External Resource Service | Infrastructure    | External resource exposure and invocation handling    |
| 5  | User                      | External actor    | Task initiation, authorization, and result consumption|

Figure 2  A summary of all functional entities]]></artwork>
          </figure></t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Multi-Agent Collaboration Protocol Suite Overview">
      <t>MACP defines a set of protocols to enable interaction among
      entities.</t>

      <section title="Agent Registration Protocol (ARP)">
        <t>The Agent Registration Protocol (ARP) is used between an Agent and
        an AGW to onboard the agent into the system <xref
        target="draft-sz-dmsc-iaip"/>. ARP is responsible for: <list
            style="symbols">
            <t>Agent identity declaration</t>

            <t>Capability registration (capability-based onboarding)</t>

            <t>Lifecycle management (registration, update, deregistration)</t>
          </list>Operational flow: <list style="numbers">
            <t>The agent sends a registration request to the AGW, including:
            agent identity information and capability vector.</t>

            <t>The AGW triggers AAAP to validate the agent (as described in
            Section 5.2).</t>

            <t>Upon successful authorization, the AGW assigns a globally
            unique Agent ID (AIC).</t>

            <t>The master AGW store the agent's capabities information in the
            local capability directory.</t>

            <t>The agent is considered available once ARP and AAAP are
            completed successfully.</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>

      <section title="Agent Authentication and Authorization Protocol (AAAP)">
        <t>The Agent Authentication and Authorization Protocol (AAAP) is used
        between the Agent Gateway (AGW) and the Agent Management Center (AMC)
        to establish trust for agents attempting to join the system.</t>

        <t>AAAP is responsible for: <list style="symbols">
            <t>Verifying the identity of an agent (via AGW as a proxy)</t>

            <t>Determining the authorization scope and permitted
            operations</t>

            <t>Issuing authorization credentials (e.g., tokens or
            certificates)</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>Operational flow: <list style="numbers">
            <t>The AGW receives a registration request from an agent.</t>

            <t>The AGW initiates an AAAP request to the AMC, carrying agent
            identity information.</t>

            <t>The AMC performs authentication and authorization checks.</t>

            <t>Upon success, the AMC returns an authorization credential and
            policy constraints.</t>

            <t>The AGW enforces the received authorization decision.</t>

            <t>The AMC acts as the trust anchor of the system, while the AGW
            acts as the policy enforcement point (PEP).</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>Note that although AAAP establishes the initial trust relationship
        between an agent and the system (i.e., onboarding trust), subsequent
        interactions between agents may require additional, context-specific
        authentication and authorization. Such interaction-level mechanisms
        are out of scope for AAAP and MAY leverage existing frameworks (e.g.,
        OAuth-based token exchange or similar delegation mechanisms) to
        support secure, fine-grained access control between agents.</t>

        <t>An agent MUST successfully complete AAAP before participating in
        discovery, invocation, or collaboration. However, successful
        onboarding via AAAP does not eliminate the need for authentication and
        authorization during runtime interactions between agents.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Capability Directory Synchronization Protocol (CDSP)">
        <t>The Capability Directory Synchronization Protocol (CDSP) is used
        between Agent Gateways (AGWs) to synchronize capability directory
        information and construct a distributed view of agent capabilities
        across the network.</t>

        <t>CDSP is designed to: <list style="symbols">
            <t>Enable distributed visibility of agent capabilities across
            multiple AGWs</t>

            <t>Avoid centralized bottlenecks in capability management</t>

            <t>Preserve privacy and scalability through abstraction</t>

            <t>Support incremental and policy-controlled synchronization.</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>Each AGW maintains a local capability directory, which is populated
        through agent registration and updated over time. CDSP enables AGWs to
        exchange selected portions of these directories so that capability
        information is not confined to a single gateway but becomes visible,
        in an abstracted form, across multiple administrative or network
        domains. To ensure scalability and protect sensitive information, CDSP
        does not transfer complete capability descriptions. Instead, AGWs
        exchange capability directory entries in a summarized form. Each entry
        represents a capability exposed by an agent and is associated its
        corresponding capability vector. The exchanged information MAY include
        semantic descriptions or structured representations of the capability,
        along with limited metadata such as version or category. Detailed
        implementation-specific information and sensitive attributes MUST NOT
        be propagated through CDSP.</t>

        <t>CDSP supports different synchronization scopes depending on
        deployment requirements. During initial establishment between peer
        AGWs or recovery scenarios, a gateway MAY perform a full
        synchronization of its capability directory. In steady-state
        operation, synchronization is typically incremental or selective,
        where only updated or policy-permitted entries are exchanged. The
        selection of entries MAY be governed by administrative policies, trust
        relationships, or capability classification. Synchronization can be
        triggered in multiple ways. An AGW MAY initiate periodic
        synchronization to maintain freshness of the distributed view. It MAY
        also perform event-driven updates when local changes occur, such as
        agent registration, deregistration, or capability updates.
        Additionally, synchronization MAY be requested on demand by peer
        gateways when needed for discovery or coordination purposes.</t>

        <t>Given the distributed nature of CDSP, strict consistency across all
        AGWs is not required. Instead, the system operates under an eventual
        consistency model, where capability directory views converge over
        time. To support this, capability entries SHOULD include versioning or
        timestamp information, allowing AGWs to reconcile updates and prefer
        the most recent information. Conflict resolution policies MAY be
        applied when inconsistencies arise. All CDSP exchanges MUST be
        authenticated and integrity-protected.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Agent Discovery Protocol (ADP)">
        <t>The Agent Discovery Protocol (ADP) enables AGWs to locate agents
        that provide required capabilities, supporting both local and
        distributed discovery.</t>

        <t>ADP is designed to: <list style="symbols">
            <t>Enable capability-based matching instead of endpoint-based
            lookup</t>

            <t>Support both low-latency local discovery and network-wide
            search</t>

            <t>Adapt to dynamic and partially known environments</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>When an agent or user request is received, the AGW evaluates the
        requested capability against its local capability directory. This
        directory includes both locally registered agents and capability
        summaries learned from other AGWs via CDSP. If a matching capability
        is found locally, the AGW can directly identify candidate agents and
        proceed with interaction setup. If the required capability cannot be
        satisfied using local information, the AGW initiates a distributed
        discovery process. In this case, the request is propagated to other
        AGWs in the network.</t>

        <t>ADP supports both proactive and reactive discovery behaviors within
        a unified framework. In proactive scenarios, AGWs maintain an updated
        distributed capability view through CDSP, thereby enabling most
        discovery requests to be resolved locally with minimal latency. In
        reactive scenarios, when local knowledge is insufficient, AGWs
        dynamically query the network to identify suitable agents. Upon
        receiving a request, an AGW evaluates it against its capability
        directory and returns matching results if available. Responses SHOULD
        include the relevant Capability vectors, the corresponding Agent ID,
        and abstracted routing or reachability information sufficient for
        subsequent interaction.</t>

        <t>Multiple candidate agents MAY be returned for a single request. The
        requesting AGW is responsible for selecting an appropriate agent based
        on local policies, optimization criteria, or contextual
        requirements.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Agent to Agent Communication overall Protocol Suites">
        <t>From the perspective of an Agent, Agent-to-Agent (A2A) interaction
        is realized through a layered protocol suite, where each layer is
        responsible for a distinct aspect of task execution, semantic
        alignment, and interaction coordination, as shown in the figure below.
        These layers collectively ensure that agent collaboration is not only
        functionally correct but also semantically consistent and
        policy-compliant.</t>

        <t>At the Application Layer, the agent is responsible for structuring
        and governing the execution of tasks prior to interaction with other
        agents. This includes task orchestration capabilities, where complex
        objectives are decomposed into smaller executable units and managed
        through an internal state model that tracks execution progress. In
        parallel, the agent applies policy and governance logic to determine
        how tasks should be executed or delegated. Such policies MAY include
        rule-based constraints and dynamic capability-based access control
        (CBAC), which influence decision-making based on context and
        authorization scope. The Application Layer also incorporates
        mechanisms for robustness and operational control, including
        human-in-the-loop (HITL) intervention and failure handling strategies
        such as escalation, retry, or fallback. The output of this layer is a
        structured and policy-compliant task intent that is ready for semantic
        processing.</t>

        <t>The Semantic Layer provides the mechanisms required to transform
        application-level intent into a representation that can be
        consistently interpreted across agents. At this layer, agents rely on
        shared or compatible ontology and profile models to express
        capabilities in terms of classes, properties, and constraints<xref
        target="draft-zhang-dmsc-ioa-semantic-interaction"/> . Before
        interaction, the agent validates the generated semantic representation
        to ensure consistency, applicability, and determinism, thereby
        avoiding ambiguity during execution. For inputs expressed in natural
        language <xref target="draft-verma-dmsc-nlip-notes"/>, the agent
        performs intent normalization <xref target="draft-sz-dmsc-iaip"/>,
        translating unstructured descriptions into structured semantic forms
        while accounting for confidence levels and potential ambiguity. To
        ensure interoperability across different domains or versions, the
        Semantic Layer also supports alignment and version governance,
        enabling mapping between heterogeneous schemas and maintaining
        compatibility. In addition, agents MAY utilize supporting knowledge
        resources, such as standardized glossaries or remediation knowledge,
        to improve interpretation and resolve inconsistencies. The output of
        this layer is a normalized and validated semantic intent that can be
        directly mapped to interaction protocols.</t>

        <t>The Coordination Layer defines the set of protocols that enable the
        agent to participate in distributed collaboration with other agents.
        This layer includes identity and trust establishment mechanisms, where
        the agent registers and maintains its identity through the Agent
        Registration Protocol (ARP) and operates under an authorization
        context provided via the Authentication and Authorization Protocol
        (AAAP). For interaction execution, the agent utilizes protocols such
        as the Task Invocation Protocol (TIP) <xref
        target="draft-yang-dmsc-ioa-task-protocol"/> and the Agent-to-Agent
        Protocol (A2A) to establish sessions, exchange messages, and
        coordinate task execution with peer agents. When the appropriate
        interaction target is not known in advance, the agent relies on the
        Agent Discovery Protocol (ADP) to identify candidate agents based on
        required capabilities. This discovery process is supported by
        capability knowledge made available through the Capability Directory
        Synchronization Protocol (CDSP), which ensures that the agent can
        perform discovery based on a distributed and continuously updated view
        of available capabilities. Together, these protocols provide the
        necessary mechanisms for secure, dynamic, and capability-driven
        interaction among agents.</t>

        <t>These three layers operate in a coordinated manner across
        well-defined boundaries. The Application Layer defines what needs to
        be done, the Semantic Layer defines how it is described and
        understood, and the Coordination Layer defines how it is executed
        across agents. This organization enables a clear separation of
        concerns while preserving end-to-end coherence across task intent,
        semantic interpretation, and protocol execution. The layers are
        logically independent, allowing task logic, semantic models, and
        interaction protocols to evolve independently without compromising
        interoperability across agents.</t>

        <t><figure>
            <artwork><![CDATA[+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                    Application Layer                             |
|                                                                  |
| +------------------+ +------------------+ +------------------+   |
| | Task             | | Policy and       | | HITL and         |   |
| | Orchestration    | | Governance       | | Failure Handling |   |
| | - decomposition  | | - policy rules   | | - escalation     |   |
| | - state model    | | - dynamic CBAC   | | - fallback/retry |   |
| +------------------+ +------------------+ +------------------+   |
+-----------------------------+------------------------------------+
                              |
                              | Application-to-Semantic Contract
                              v
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                      Semantic Layer                              |
|                                                                  |
| +------------------+ +------------------+ +------------------+   |
| | Ontology and     | | Validation and   | | Natural-Language |   |
| | Profile Model    | | Rules            | | Intent           |   |
| | - classes and    | | - consistency    | | Normalization    |   |
| |   properties     | | - applicability  | | - text to intent |   |
| | - constraints    | | - deterministic  | | - confidence and |   |
| +------------------+ +------------------+ |   ambiguity      |   |
|                                           +------------------+   |
| +------------------+ +------------------+                        |
| | Alignment and    | | Knowledge        |                        |
| | Version          | | Resources        |                        |
| | Governance       | | - glossary/codes |                        |
| | - mapping        | | - remediation    |                        |
| |   confidence     | |   knowledge      |                        |
| | - compatibility  | |                  |                        |
| |                  | |                  |                        |
| +------------------+ +------------------+                        |
+-----------------------------+------------------------------------+
                              |
                              | Semantic-to-Interaction Contract
                              v
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                   Coordination Layer                             |
|       +---------------------+   +---------------------+          |
|       | Register & Identity |   |  Authentication     |          |
|       | - ARP               |   |  & Authorization    |          |
|       |                     |   |  - AAAP             |          |
|       +---------------------+   +---------------------+          |
|       +---------------------+   +---------------------+          |
|       | Invocation & Session|   | Sync & Discovery    |          | 
|       | - TIP               |   | - CDSP              |          |
|       | - A2A               |   | - ADP               |          |
|       +---------------------+   +---------------------+          |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
                              |
                              v
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|       Transport Connectivity + Security Enforcement              |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
  Figure 3 Agent to Agent Communication overall Protocol Suites
]]></artwork>
          </figure></t>
      </section>

      <section title="Agent to External Resource Service Protocol">
        <t>Interaction between agents and external resources (ERS) is
        supported via existing protocols such as: <list style="symbols">
            <t>Model Context Protocol (MCP)</t>

            <t>Agent-to-Tool (A2T)</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>MACP does not redefine these protocols but enables their
        integration within the architecture.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Capability Model">
      <t>Capabilities are the core abstraction in MACP. <list style="symbols">
          <t>Each capability is associated with a Capability vector.</t>

          <t>Capabilities are registered, indexed, and discovered via
          AGWs.</t>

          <t>Capability information is abstracted during synchronization to
          protect sensitive details.</t>

          <t>Capability descriptions MAY be semantic or structured depending
          on use case.</t>
        </list> This abstraction enables flexible and scalable service
      composition.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="iana" title="IANA Considerations">
      <t>TBD</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Acknowledgement">
      <t>TBD</t>
    </section>
  </middle>

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8259"
?>

      <reference anchor="GW-REQ">
        <front>
          <title>Gateway Requirements for Dynamic Multi-agents Secured
          Collaboration. draft-liu-dmsc-gw-requirements.
          &lt;https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-dmsc-gw-requirements/&gt;</title>

          <author fullname="Bing Liu" initials="B" surname="L">
            <organization/>
          </author>

          <date day="16" month="January" year="2026"/>
        </front>
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="draft-yang-dmsc-ioa-task-protocol">
        <front>
          <title>Internet of Agents Task Protocol (IoA Task Protocol) for
          Heterogeneous Agent Collaboration.
          draft-yang-dmsc-ioa-task-protocol.
          &lt;https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yang-dmsc-ioa-task-protocol/&gt;</title>

          <author fullname="Cheng Yang" initials="C" surname="Y">
            <organization/>
          </author>

          <date day="14" month="January" year="2026"/>
        </front>
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="draft-sz-dmsc-iaip">
        <front>
          <title>Intent-based Agent Interconnection Protocol at Agent Gateway.
          draft-sz-dmsc-iaip.
          &lt;https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sz-dmsc-iaip/&gt;</title>

          <author fullname="ShengSun" initials="S" surname="S">
            <organization/>
          </author>

          <date day="9" month="February" year="2026"/>
        </front>
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="draft-zhang-dmsc-ioa-semantic-interaction">
        <front>
          <title>Ontology-based Semantic Interaction for Internet of Agents.
          draft-zhang-dmsc-ioa-semantic-interaction.
          &lt;https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhang-dmsc-ioa-semantic-interaction/&gt;</title>

          <author fullname="Lianhua Zhang" initials="L" surname="Z">
            <organization/>
          </author>

          <date day="4" month="February" year="2026"/>
        </front>
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="draft-verma-dmsc-nlip-notes">
        <front>
          <title>Use of Natural Language for Agent Communication.
          draft-verma-dmsc-nlip-notes.
          &lt;https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-verma-dmsc-nlip-notes/&gt;</title>

          <author fullname="Dinesh C. Verma" initials="D" surname="V">
            <organization/>
          </author>

          <date day="11" month="February" year="2026"/>
        </front>
      </reference>
    </references>
  </back>
</rfc>
