Re: The growing number of "x402" documents

Hello,
At 10:30 AM 25-05-2026, [email protected] wrote:
>Thanks for the clarification on the two paths ; helpful to make our 
>goal explicit
>
>Our intent for the current batch is publication via the Independent 
>Submission Editor as Informational documents per RFC  4846
>we are establishing a stable reference for implementers  while 
>inviting community  review without seeking IETF Working Group 
>endorsement at this stage.
>
>That said, some drafts in the family are more general than the x402 
>STARK receipt specifics and could benefit from broader IETF process 
>if community interest materialises.
>In particular :
>draft-vauban-x402-vpsf-algebra-01 (claim algebra over  receipt 
>types, applicable beyond x402)
>draft-vauban-x402-lifecycle-fsm-01 (payment lifecycle FSM, format-agnostic)
>these 2 feels like candidates that a DISPATCH discussion could 
>productively examine.
>
>  For the more product-specific drafts (STARK receipts, post-quantum 
> discipline, Starknet anchor, delegation binding), ISE remains the 
> right fit ithink
>
>I Would be happy to engage DISPATCH on the two general drafts if the 
>community signals interest and i remain open to specific feedback in 
>either direction.

I took a quick look at some of the x401 drafts.  I wasn't sure 
whether the "Independent Submission" in the top-left corner was 
intentional or not.  The last paragraph in the Introduction 
Section(s) clarified that.

A x402 Foundation is expected to be established.  I could not figure 
its relationship with the Linux Foundation.  According to the Linux 
Foundation, there is supposed to be a "x402 standard".  It would be 
quite odd to describe an "Informational" RFC as a standard.  There 
are people who do that in practice.  I might mention it as I did here 
given that this discussion is part of an IETF activity.

I suggest getting reviews of the drafts given https://www.x402scan.com/

Regards,
S. Moonesamy