Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Official NTI-1 Contributor Issues Opened

Hi Abisheak and colleagues,

A quick update: the two Rust regression cases and Cargo CI job are submitted in  https://github.com/abisheakp197/nti-spec/pull/24 .

Both tests compiled and ran against the confirmed engine commit. They exposed two behaviors for review:

An unsigned capability token returned Allow instead of the required Deny.


With a quorum requirement of two and one eligible module, the module executed once instead of remaining blocked.



The existing Python sidecar tests passed. The execution details and retained logs are linked in  https://github.com/bigblackcoder/nti-spec/pull/1 .

The connected GitHub integration blocked upstream writes with a 403 permission error, so I submitted the PR through my GitHub session.

If a working session is still useful, I can propose:

Monday, November 2: noon–12:45 p.m. Chicago / 10–10:45 a.m. Pacific. 


Tuesday, November 3: noon–12:45 p.m. Chicago / 10–10:45 a.m. Pacific.


Wednesday, November 4: noon–12:45 p.m. Chicago / 10–10:45 a.m. Pacific.



Monday is my preference. Tymofii and Lee are welcome to join. We can review the results and agree on the next runtime test.










Best regards,

Larry Lewis

Founder, SovrLabs

Chair, W3C Agent Trust Protocol Community Group




From: Larry Lewis <llewis@sovrlabs.com>
To: "Abisheak P"<abisheakp197@gmail.com>
Cc: "Steven Zhao"<zhaoxinghua07@126.com>, "public-agentprotocol"<public-agentprotocol@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2026 22:46:23 -0500
Subject: Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Official NTI-1 Contributor Issues Opened





Hi Abisheak, Xinghua, and colleagues,

My apologies for the delay. I am working on the items. Thank you for opening #20. My GitHub handle is bigblackcoder. I’ll take the first pass on the two Rust regression cases we discussed, targeting ube-foundation commit 308fd1c95f2c2f975e8b6b6c5e7ccba0e4d7b203.

I checked asl-conformance.yml; it currently runs the Python sidecar self-test. The contribution will therefore also need a Cargo test job so the Rust cases are compiled and executed. I’ll keep the scope to those two cases and their reproducible execution, with any failures reported as observed.

Xinghua, thank you for acknowledging my refinements and preserving the archived references. I agree with keeping responder tryLater, timeout, and stale-root outcomes distinguishable, and evaluating the admitted operation against its declared contract.

Please confirm the exact contribution cutoff for the proceedings so I can assess the timing.



On November 6, I'm still working on the opportunity to attend. I will respond accordingly with you and Kaliya soon. 



Is there anything I may have missed that needs my attention as work through the items? 



Best regards,

Larry Lewis

Founder, SovrLabs

Chair, W3C Agent Trust Protocol Community Group









From: Abisheak P < mailto:abisheakp197@gmail.com >
To: "Steven Zhao"< mailto:zhaoxinghua07@126.com >
Cc: "public-agentprotocol"< mailto:public-agentprotocol@w3.org >
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2026 21:25:01 -0500
Subject: Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Official NTI-1 Contributor Issues Opened












Hi Steven,



Perfect. I saw you claimed #19. Your conditions are fully accepted:



1. Full attribution to your W3C archived message.

2. Pointers to the dated source.

3. The code is a harness, not the spec itself.



Please open the PR whenever you are ready. The CI is waiting.



One quick question: Kaliya just asked me if you or Larry are attending AIW in person on Nov 6th. She has offered me a remote "Owl" dial-in slot at 10 AM, and would love for the session to be co-hosted if either of you are in the room. Let me know so I can confirm with her.



Best,

Abisheak




On Sat, 31 Oct, 2026, 6:14 am Steven Zhao, < mailto:zhaoxinghua07@126.com > wrote:





Hi Abisheak, Larry, Lee, Lars, all,
 
 Abisheak: my GitHub handle is zhaoxinghua09-cell, and I am claiming issue #19 ( https://github.com/abisheakp197/nti-spec/issues/19 ). Thank you for opening it for the LGD transition contract and resume_basis.
 
 On what I will put into that issue: the two finish-or-stop contracts, the tier-1 receipt field list, and resume_basis (evidence | exemption), exactly as stated in my message of 30 October ( https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-agentprotocol/2026Oct/0108.html ), including the specification attached to that message. The contract wording is the contribution I stand behind; the accompanying code is only a runnable harness for exercising and breaking those contracts, and is not offered as part of the specification. I will submit as pull requests against the spec text, with one request: where a merged version derives from that message, keep the attribution and a pointer to the archived original, so a reader can always check the wording against the dated source. I aim to open the pull requests before the AIW Book of Proceedings cutoff.
 
 Larry ( https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-agentprotocol/2026Oct/0090.html ): your two refinements are right, and they fit the incomplete_check block without touching it. A tryLater response is an answer that arrived and belongs in the record as received; a timeout or a missing response is a different outcome and must be recorded separately, never inferred. And requiring at T-30 that no subsequent call is admitted, while scoring the already-admitted call against its declared contract, is the cleaner split. It measures the two guarantees independently, as you said.
 
 Lee ( https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-agentprotocol/2026Oct/0109.html ): I accept the constraint: the mapping stays unidirectional, check outcome to boundary value. incomplete_check is a record of the runtime's check attempt; the wire value set is untouched, so a PAUSE with no receipt attached is still a well-formed record, and a receipt that says PAUSE(authority_not_determined) always carries its incomplete_check reason.
 
 I will also file the registry outcome rows (reachable, unreachable, stale_root) against #19, so all three modes stay distinct from authority_revoked.
 
 Best regards,
 
 Xinghua Zhao
 Independent researcher
 ORCID 0009-0001-0512-1237
 
 [Disclosure: drafting of this message was assisted by AI; all positions reviewed and approved by me. Same disclosure as my earlier messages on this list.]