AICENT-002 — Resonant Time Transfer Protocol (RTTP)
Intent addressing for autonomous systems — synchronized in time
rttp resolves where & when; iqa states whether — and where the two agree, action begins.
rttp:// is a URI scheme for intent addressing. An rttp URI names an intent; the address is derived, not looked up. The scheme is registered with IANA (Provisional, CRI 27).
Intent addressing — deterministic resolution
Intent addressing: a URI names what the subject is to do, not which machine to reach. An rttp URI is a claim of intent against an identified subject; the address is computed from the authority itself — no lookup, no TTL, no registry, no DNS. The URI is an entry fingerprint; the AID is the identity.
The name is a claim — Resonant Time
Synchronized in time: the temporal half of the name is the commitment, and it is kept by structure, not by benchmarks. Resolution is computation — one SHA-256, zero network calls — so the latency of addressing an intent is bounded and does not scale with the network. Intent addressing without the time constraint would be little more than an agent DNS; the two halves are one claim.
One click, nothing installed, no administrator rights — removable later in the browser's protocol-handler settings. The address is rttp://<intent>.<pillar>.<root>/<action>. Reaching it from a web page adds the browser's own reserved prefix, which is the same address, not a second protocol — same authority, same path, same derived ROUTE_SHARD, and the equivalence is covered by the published conformance vectors. The form without that prefix reaches the same place through a one-time OS registration instead. Verified on Windows Chrome. The resolver page needs no registration at all.
Verify it yourself
Three individual implementations, one published vector set — same bytes. The conformance challenge accepts any language.
// rttp 1.2.8 - PyPI & npm - 1.2.8-alpha - crates.io
// Three individual implementations, one published vector set — same bytes.
$ pip install rttp && python -m rttp.selftest
[PASS] all 80 checks passed (3 skipped) # default install
$ pip install rttp[ed25519] && python -m rttp.selftest
[PASS] all 83 checks passed # with the optional Ed25519 backend
$ npx @aicent/rttp
[PASS] all 35 checks passed (node, individual)
$ cargo add rttp@1.2.8-alpha && cargo test
test conformance::tests::shipped_vectors_replay_green ... ok
[PASS] all 37 checks passed (1 skipped)
// Address form: rttp://<intent>.<pillar>.<root>/<action> (AICENT-002 §10.2)
// Resolution is a computation over the authority: no DNS, no key directory.
What the specification states
Values below are properties of the scheme and of the published conformance checks — not measured latency claims.
rttp v1.2.8 — published packages
measured 2026-09-21 against the published artifacts · re-asserted by CI on every push
Use Cases Comparison
Best use cases for different protocols
Suitable Scenarios
Suitable Scenarios
The Autonomous AI Stack
Eight Pillars stack distributed architecture powered by RTTP
RTTP
Intent addressing
RPKI
Trust verification
ZCMK
Metering and settlement
GTIOT®
Edge execution
AICENT-NET
Collective compute network
BEWHO®
Identity layer
Stateful Data Flow Across The Eight Pillars
An rttp URI is a claim of intent against an AID; the routing label is derived from the authority, so the same authority always yields the same ROUTE_SHARD.
Anticipated Objections
Q1 · What is RTTP? · click to expand
RTTP denotes Resonant Time Transfer Protocol — the addressing pillar. An rttp:// URI names an intent against an authority (intent.pillar.root); the address is derived by computation — one SHA-256, no DNS, no registry, no fetch. The name is a claim: intent addressing under a real-time constraint — synchronized in time, with resolution latency bounded and independent of network scale.
Q2 · What is IQA? · click to expand
IQA denotes Identity Quality Assurance — the attestation pillar. An iqa:// URI asks a named Organ for a verdict about a subject's standing: one of Ghost, Probation, Radiant, Genesis — a closed set. A verdict is an answer, not a computation: seals are HMAC-SHA256 over the canonical claim, bound to the subject's key material, verifiable offline — no issuer, no key directory, no network call. "I QA" — I, the answerer.
Q3 · Why not just use regular https URLs? · click to expand
A https URL states where a resource lives — you must fetch it to know anything. An rttp URI is computed, not looked up: the address is derived from the authority by SHA-256, with no DNS, no registry query and no fetch. The intent is part of the identifier itself, and anyone can verify the derivation offline.
Q4 · Why two schemes instead of one? · click to expand
Because they answer different kinds of questions. rttp resolves where — and when — by pure computation, needing no one's word. iqa states whether — a named Organ's verdict about a subject. Two namespaces keep the question channel and the attestation channel apart: the computation never depends on anyone's word, and the attestation never pretends to be computation.
Q5 · Is this a performance claim — faster than PTP? · click to expand
No. The temporal half of the name is a structural commitment, not a benchmark: resolution is computation, so addressing latency does not scale with the network. Clock synchronization is PTP's discipline and remains its own; RTTP borrows the discipline of time transfer for intent — two parties compute the same address into agreement without a shared lookup.
Q6 · How do I verify any of this? · click to expand
Replay the conformance vectors at iqa.org/challenge/ (35 vectors, any language, byte for byte), or install the packages from the URI Center.
Don't take our word for any of it — replay the vectors at iqa.org/challenge/ or run the demos at iqa.org/demo/.