



Quantum Internet Research Group                        A. S. Cacciapuoti
Internet-Draft                                                M. Caleffi
Intended status: Informational                                J. Illiano
Expires: 22 October 2026                                      C. De Risi
                                        University of Naples Federico II
                                                                A. Abane
                          National Institute of Standards and Technology
                                                                J. Chung
       Argonne National Laboratory -- Data Science and Learning Division
                                                           20 April 2026


   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and Philosophy for the Quantum
                                Internet
         draft-cacciapuoti-qirg-quantum-native-architecture-01

Abstract

   This document extends RFC 9340 by outlining a set of quantum-native
   architectural tenets for the design and evolution of the Quantum
   Internet.  These principles should not be interpreted as dogmas, but
   as pragmatic guidelines and criteria for harnessing the unique
   properties of quantum entanglement within networked systems.  Such
   design perspectives, while departing from the classical Internet,
   remain aligned with a foundational insight: the principle of constant
   change, articulated in RFC 1958.

   The document specifies quantum-native extensions to the Quantum
   Internet framework, defining an entanglement packet switching
   paradigm and an explicit separation between the Quantum Data Plane
   and Quantum Control Plane.  It introduces Quantum Internet Addressing
   to extend quantum semantics into control and coordination, and
   generalizes the classical forwarding concept to quantum packets.

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."



Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026                [Page 1]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


   This Internet-Draft will expire on 22 October 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.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Architectural Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  Quantum Data Plane (QDP)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  Quantum Control Plane (QCP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.3.  Hierarchy & EDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   5.  Quantum Internet Addressing (QA)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     5.1.  Quantum Packet  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       5.1.1.  Quantum Packet Structure  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   6.  Generalized Quantum Forwarding (GQF)  . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     6.1.  Role within the Architecture  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   7.  Quantum-Native Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   8.  Routing Models and Repeater Realizations Support  . . . . . .  14
     8.1.  Routing-Model Agnosticism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     8.2.  Repeater-Generation Agnosticism . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   9.  Multi-Domain Routing and Forwarding . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     9.1.  Intra- and Inter-Domain Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     9.2.  Quantum Addressing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     9.3.  Quantum Forwarding  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   12. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   13. Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19











Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026                [Page 2]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


1.  Introduction

   The Quantum Internet will interconnect quantum devices to enable
   distributed quantum functionalities built upon shared entanglement.
   RFC 9340 [RFC9340] laid the initial foundation for such an Internet,
   defining its motivation and goals.  At that time, the role of a
   distinct Quantum Control Plane (QCP) was explicitly declared out of
   scope.  Subsequent work on multiplane quantum network architectures
   has further highlighted the need for control functions
   [QI-MULTIPLANE].  This document revisits that open question left by
   RFC 9340, by arguing that explicit control is necessary.  However,
   this alone is not sufficient: control must also evolve beyond
   classical coordination toward quantum-native orchestration.  To this
   end, the document presents an architectural framework that makes this
   distinction explicit.

   Recent theoretical progress [CalCac25], [CacCal26] has underscored
   the critical importance of revisiting the open question of how should
   we design the control plane of the Quantum Internet?  Quantum
   entanglement is a non-local and volatile resource, and it is
   therefore inherently stateful [IllCal22] from a networking
   perspective.  Indeed, in a quantum network, local operations at one
   node can instantaneously affect correlated states at remote nodes, by
   dynamically reconfiguring entanglement relations among nodes and
   thereby modifying the connectivity graph induced by entanglement.  As
   entanglement relations evolve across nodes and over time, continuous
   monitoring, timely state dissemination, and latency-aware control
   become necessary for the effective exploitation of entanglement.
   Accordingly, the network has to track and expose explicitly resource
   descriptors, including, at a minimum, fidelity, residual coherence
   time, and ownership (i.e., the nodes participating in a given
   entanglement relation).  If left uncoordinated, these entanglement
   features can trigger the amplification principle [CalCac25], whereby
   uncontrolled entanglement resources cause routing ambiguities,
   resource inefficiencies and, ultimately, network instability.  It is
   evident that under these entanglement features an explicit control is
   necessary.  However, a purely classical control cannot maintain a
   consistent global view as quantum networks scale, becoming the
   limiting factor for performance and scalability.  In summary,
   scalable quantum network architectures require not only explicit
   tracking and management of entanglement resources, but also control
   mechanisms that evolve beyond classical coordination.

   Building on the above considerations, this document updates and
   extends the architectural principles defined in RFC 9340 [RFC9340],
   by introducing a set of quantum-native architectural tenets for the
   design of the Quantum Internet.  These tenets should not be intended
   as dogmas, but as pragmatic guidelines to harness the unique physical



Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026                [Page 3]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


   properties of quantum entanglement within networked systems.  In this
   sense, the proposed approach echoes the enduring ``principle of
   constant change'' articulated in RFC 1958 [RFC1958], reaffirming that
   adaptability remains the cornerstone of Internet evolution.

   Specifically, this document introduces a quantum-native control and
   forwarding architecture composed of the following interlocking
   components:

   *  Quantum Data Plane (QDP): the operational plane that carries and
      manipulates entangled qubits (ebits) for applications such as
      teleportation.  It generalizes the classical notion of forwarding
      to the quantum domain through Generalized Quantum Forwarding
      (GQF).

   *  Quantum Control Plane (QCP): the entanglement-orchestrator plane
      that manages entanglement resources throughout their entire life-
      cycle by relying on the Entanglement-Defined Controller (EDC), a
      distributed control entity analogous to a Software-Defined
      Networking (SDN) controller, but operating on entanglement
      resources to maintain global coherence.

   Accordingly, this document defines three core mechanisms -- Quantum
   Internet Addressing (QA), Generalized Quantum Forwarding (GQF), and
   Entanglement-Defined Controller (EDC) -- that together form the basis
   for scalable, entanglement-driven coordination across heterogeneous
   quantum domains.

2.  Scope

   This document is Informational.  It proposes architectural tenets and
   guidance for researchers and implementers.  It is not a protocol
   specification.  Terminology and notation adhere to monospaced ASCII
   presentation for clarity in IRTF review contexts.

3.  Terminology

   This section defines key terms used throughout this document.  Some
   definitions extend those introduced in RFC 9340 [RFC9340], reflecting
   the evolution from classical coordination to quantum-native
   orchestration.

   *  Quantum Data Plane (QDP): The QDP is the operational plane of the
      Quantum Internet that generalizes entanglement forwarding to the
      quantum domain through GQF.  It is responsible for the generation
      of elementary link-level entanglement and for the execution of
      quantum operations, including entanglement swapping and
      purification.



Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026                [Page 4]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


   *  Quantum Control Plane (QCP): The QCP is the logical plane of the
      Quantum Internet responsible for orchestrating entanglement
      resources by exploiting quantum-addressing abstractions and
      relying on the Entanglement-Defined Controllers (EDCs)

   *  Entanglement Service Provider (ESP): The ESP is a network entity
      of the QDP that provides entanglement connectivity to both end-
      nodes and peer ESPs.  ESPs collectively form the ``entangled-
      backbone''.

   *  Entanglement-Defined Controller (EDC): The Entanglement-Defined
      Controller is the logical entity of the QCP responsible for
      orchestrating entanglement resources across ESPs through
      reconfiguration, monitoring and policy enforcement.  It maintains
      a view of the network’s entanglement state, to enable scalable and
      adaptive control.

   *  Quantum Internet Addressing (QA): An addressing scheme in which
      node identifiers are represented as quantum states.  It serves as
      addressing abstraction of the QCP.

   *  Generalized Quantum Forwarding (GQF): A forwarding abstraction
      that generalizes the classical prefix-matching forwarding to the
      quantum domain.

   The above terminology forms the conceptual foundation of this
   document.  The QDP and QCP represent the two key planes of the
   architecture.  Within these planes, ESPs (network entities) implement
   entanglement forwarding and maintenance, while EDCs (logical
   entities) orchestrate the entanglement resources.  QA and GQF provide
   quantum-native abstractions for addressing and stateful forwarding.

4.  Architectural Overview

   This section extends Section 5 of [RFC9340].

   The Quantum Internet is an entanglement-packet switching network,
   where entangled qubits (ebits) replace classical packets as the basic
   network units, carrying quantum correlations across network nodes.
   This paradigm is not merely an optimization or a refinement of the
   classical packet-switching paradigm, but a fundamental departure
   imposed by the unique constraints of quantum mechanics.  Indeed,
   while the goal of the classical packet-switching paradigm is to
   determine the best next-hops toward a set of nodes (routing) and to
   forward packets along those hops from source to destination,
   entanglement-packet switching aims to distribute and manipulate
   entanglement among quantum nodes, ultimately entangling the source
   and destination(s) regardless of their physical location.



Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026                [Page 5]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


   By inheriting statefulness and non-locality, this switching model
   departs from the end-to-end principle [RFC1958], [RFC3439], a key
   tenet of the classical Internet design.  Indeed, it requires in-
   network operations and persistent state awareness across all phases
   of the entanglement life-cycle -- from generation and distribution to
   storage and final utilization.  A broader discussion of the notion of
   statefulness adopted in this document is provided in [IllCal22].
   Combined with the sophisticated and resource-intensive nature of
   state-of-the-art quantum hardware, this paradigm advocates
   concentrating the complexity inside the network, while keeping the
   edges simple.  As a consequence, it mandates a clear decoupling
   between the QDP, which handles qubit operations, and the QCP, which
   orchestrates entanglement.

+--------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------------+
| Network      |Classical Internet                 |Quantum Internet       |
| Feature      |                                   |                       |
+--------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------------+
|Resource      |Communication links change slowly  |Entanglement is        |
|Persistence   |relative to packet forward         |ephemeral and depleted |
|              |dynamics                           |upon use               |
+--------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------------+
|Control plane |It is grounded in classical        |It is grounded in      |
|              |topological-driven abstractions    |quantum-native         |
|              |such as IP-style addressing        |abstractions, such as  |
|              |                                   |quantum addressing     |
+--------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------------+
|Data plane    |Packet forwarding                  |Generalized quantum    |
|              |                                   |forwarding             |
+--------------+-----------------------------------+-----------------------+

4.1.  Quantum Data Plane (QDP)

   The QDP constitutes the operational plane of the Quantum Internet.
   It provides the substrate on which entanglement-based connectivity --
   also referred to as quantum connectivity -- is established and
   maintained among remote nodes.  Within the QDP, network entities
   exchange and manipulate ebits to establish, extend, and refresh
   quantum correlations across the network.

   The QDP supports a set of primitives, such as the generation of
   elementary link-level entanglement and the execution of quantum
   operations including entanglement swapping and purification
   [AbaCub25].

   Unlike its classical counterpart, the QDP does not act on user
   information directly (data in the traditional sense), but it operates
   on entanglement that applications later exploit (e.g., quantum



Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026                [Page 6]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


   teleportation and distributed quantum processing).  Each
   entanglement-link represents a consumable network resource that must
   be created, maintained, and periodically refreshed as coherence
   decays.

   The QDP interfaces closely with the QCP to expose real-time KPIs and
   metrics such as fidelity, coherence time, and link availability.
   These metrics support adaptive entanglement management and allow the
   QCP to optimize resource allocation, path selection, and recovery
   procedures.  The logical interface between the QCP and QDP may be
   realized through classical or quantum signaling channels, functioning
   analogously to the control-to-data interface in software-defined
   networks [KreRam14].  Detailed protocol specifications are out of
   scope for this document.

       ┌─────────────────────────────┐ ┌────────────────────────────┐
       │                             │ │                            │
       │       Plane Abstraction     │ │        Network and         │
       │                             │ │       Logical Entities     │
       │                             │ │                            │
       │┌───────────────────────────┐│ │┌──────────────────────────┐│
       ││ (1) (QCP)                 ││ ││ (3) (EDC)                ││
       ││ Quantum Control Plane:    ││ ││ Entanglement-Defined     ││
       ││ Entanglement-Orchestrator ││ ││ Controller:              ││
       ││                           ││ ││ QCP's Logical Entity     ││
       ││                           ││ ││                          ││
       │└─────────────^─────────────┘│ │└─────────────^────────────┘│
       │              │              │ │              │             │
       │    Controller Functions:    │ │     Controller Functions:  │
       │    - Reconfiguration        │ │     - Reconfiguration      │
       │    - Monitoring             │ │     - Monitoring           │
       │    - Policy Enforcement     │ │     - Policy Enforcement   │
       │              │              │ │              │             │
       │┌─────────────v─────────────┐│ │┌─────────────v────────────┐│
       ││ (2) (QDP)                 ││ ││ (4) (ESP)                ││
       ││ Quantum Data Plane :      ││ ││ Entanglement Service     ││
       ││                           ││ ││       Provider:          ││
       ││ Operational Plane         ││ ││ QDP's Network Entity     ││
       ││                           ││ ││                          ││
       │└───────────────────────────┘│ │└──────────────────────────┘│
       └─────────────────────────────┘ └────────────────────────────┘

       Figure 1: Mapping between plane abstractions and architectural
      entities, showing: (1) the QCP as the entanglement-orchestration
      plane, (2) the QDP as the operational plane, (3) the EDC as the
       QCP logical entity, and (4) the ESPs as QDP network entities.





Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026                [Page 7]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


4.2.  Quantum Control Plane (QCP)

   The QCP is the entanglement-orchestration plane of the Quantum
   Internet, maintaining a consistent view of entanglement resources
   across the network.

   In this document, the term control plane is adopted from classical
   networking terminology, where it denotes the network-wide logic that
   controls packet forwarding among a network, as well as the
   configuration and management of these devices and their services
   [yang2004rfc3746], [KurRos10].  By analogy, the QCP orchestrates the
   entanglement life-cycle -- from generation to distribution and
   exploitation.  Unlike its classical counterpart, the QCP must account
   for the stateful and non-local nature of entanglement, while
   coherence-time constraints demand time-aware coordination across the
   network.

   As indicated in Section 1, effective tracking and management of
   entanglement resources are essential for scalable quantum network
   architectures.  However, if such tracking relies solely on classical
   control and signaling, the resulting coordination overhead and
   latency prevent the system from maintaining a consistent global view,
   ultimately hindering scalability.  Even in classical networks, where
   entanglement is absent, it has been shown that the number of control
   messages required per topology change (namely, the updating
   communication overhead) cannot scale better than linearly on
   Internet-like topologies [KriCla07].  In the quantum setting, this
   challenge becomes even more pronounced due to the intrinsic
   statefulness and fragility of entanglement, and it is further
   exacerbated when multipartite entanglement is considered [IllCal22].

   The QCP coexists with the classical control plane, complementing
   rather than replacing it.  While the QCP introduces quantum-native
   mechanisms for entanglement orchestration, both the QCP and the QDP
   rely on an underlying classical communication substrate.  Indeed,
   classical signaling remains necessary for the functioning of a
   quantum network, including, for example, the transmission of
   measurement outcomes required to trigger conditional operations at
   remote nodes, as also discussed in [RFC9340].  Accordingly, the
   architecture described in this document can be interpreted as
   augmenting classical control mechanisms rather than replacing them.
   A detailed characterization of the interaction between the classical
   control plane and the QCP/QDP architecture is outside the scope of
   this document and remains an open research question.







Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026                [Page 8]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


   Architecturally, the QCP defines a distinct yet tightly coupled
   control logic above the QDP.  The QCP interfaces directly with ESPs,
   which expose local entanglement capabilities, while ensuring
   consistent entanglement resource policies through EDCs.

4.3.  Hierarchy & EDC

  +--------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
  |         Classical Tenets       |     Quantum-Native Tenets         |
  +--------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
  | Complexity located at the      | Complexity concentrated in the    |
  | network edges                  | core network                      |
  +--------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
  | Stateless core network         | Stateful core network             |
  +--------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
  | End-to-end protocol design     | Network-mediated protocol design  |
  +--------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

   Building on the above considerations, the network architecture is
   organized into a two-tier structure, that distinguishes between ESPs
   and quantum-edge nodes:

   *  Bottom Tier (tier-1): Edge quantum nodes (e.g., quantum
      processors, sensors, and cryptographic devices) consume
      entanglement resources to support quantum applications.  These
      edge nodes primarily connect to nearby ESPs via short-range
      quantum links.

   *  Top Tier (tier-2): ESPs form the entanglement-core network.  They
      provide end-to-end entanglement-based connectivity to the lowest
      tier by proactively maintaining entangled resources among each
      other.  The ESPs can be interconnected via long-range quantum
      links, such as optical fibers, and they are equipped with the
      sophisticated and resource-intensive infrastructure required for
      entanglement generation and distribution.

   Overall orchestration is achieved through EDCs: distributed logical
   entities that maintain coherent global or partial topological views.
   EDCs act as the quantum-native counterpart of SDN controllers,
   linking control logic directly to quantum states and enabling state-
   aware, entanglement-driven routing.

   EDCs perform primarily three control-plane functions:

   *  Reconfiguration: Dynamic management and reallocation of
      entanglement resources among ESPs.





Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026                [Page 9]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


   *  Monitoring: Assessment of fidelity, coherence time, and
      availability of entanglement resources across ESPs.

   *  Policy enforcement: Application of global policies for routing,
      resource allocation, and entanglement-loss recovery.

   Although an EDC reflects a centralized control logic, the
   architecture supports multiple, potentially federated controllers.
   These EDCs coordinate to share partial topological knowledge and
   enforce consistent entanglement resource policies, while preserving
   local autonomy and scalability.

                  +---------------------------------------+
                  | (2)                                   |
                  | Entanglement Defined Controller (EDC) |
                  +---------^-----^-----^-----------------+
                            |     |     |
                            |Reconfiguration
                            |     |     |        Quantum Control Plane (QCP)
                            |     |Monitoring
                            |     |     |
                            |     |     |Policy Enforcement
----------------------------+-----+-----+-----------------------------
                            |     |     |
Entanglement-defined        |     |     |        Quantum Data Plane (QDP)
Networking                  |     |     |
                            |     |     |
      +---------------------v-----v-----v--------------------------+
      | Top Tier      (1)                                          |
      | Tier 2                                                     |
      |     +-------+          +-------+               +--------+  |
      |     |       |          |       |               |        |  |
      |     | ESP_1 +----------+ ESP_2 +-----...-------+ ESP_n  |  |
      |     |       |          |       |               |        |  |
      |     +-------+          +-------+               +--------+  |
      +------------------------------------------------------------+

   Figure 2: Entanglement-Defined Network Architecture showing: (1)
    ESPs forming a virtual mesh via proactive entanglement sharing
          (dashed lines), (2) the EDC responsible of the QCP
                           functionalities.










Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026               [Page 10]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


5.  Quantum Internet Addressing (QA)

   The architectural decoupling of the QCP and QDP is a necessary
   condition for scalability, but it is not sufficient.  To manage in-
   network operations and maintain persistent state awareness required
   by entanglement, the control plane itself must be designed to embrace
   quantum principles and phenomena for effectively controlling
   entanglement dynamics.  This requirement follows once again from the
   non-local nature of quantum entanglement: entanglement proximity
   cannot be confined to physical distance or restricted to fixed
   topological neighborhoods.  As a result, control mechanisms based on
   locality and topological-driven addressing, such as IP, are
   inherently unable to efficiently track, respond to, or propagate
   entanglement state evolution across the network.  Although
   alternative approaches have been proposed in classical networking,
   they have not seen widespread adoption in current networking
   architectures.  Regardless, such approaches remain fundamentally
   grounded in classical abstractions and are not designed to natively
   capture or manipulate the quantum-state semantics of entanglement
   resources.  A fundamental rethinking of network addressing and
   control mechanisms is therefore needed to embed quantum behavior
   directly into the node identifiers, thereby elevating the control
   plane to a quantum-native level.

   Quantum addressing (QA) provides the logical foundation for this
   quantum-native control model.  QA does not replace classical
   addressing; rather, QA complements it by enabling control and
   forwarding functions to be expressed directly on quantum states.
   Accordingly, each network node is associated with two types of
   identifiers: i) a classical address, such as an IP address, required
   for classical communications and signaling; and ii) a quantum
   address, represented by a quantum state |A> of an N-qubit system.

   Since qubit states can exist in superposition, a sequence of N-qubits
   can encode a single node identity, i.e., a single quantum network
   address, or a superposition of node identities, each corresponding to
   a distinct network address.  In this way, a single quantum address
   can represent a set of quantum nodes, independently of their physical
   or topological location, inherently supporting compactness of routing
   tables.

5.1.  Quantum Packet

   In the entanglement-packet switching paradigm, packet forwarding
   relies on the manipulation of shared entanglement resources across
   network nodes.  Therefore the QA model requires a corresponding
   quantum packet structure that supports quantum-native forwarding and
   routing operations.



Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026               [Page 11]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


5.1.1.  Quantum Packet Structure

   A quantum packet consists of a quantum header and a quantum payload.

   *  Quantum Header: carries quantum addresses that enable network
      nodes to interpret and forward (in the generalized sense) quantum
      packets according to the quantum-routing logic.  The header may
      also carry additional control information [CacCal26].

   *  Quantum Payload: carries the entanglement qubits |e_i>
      constituting the network resource manipulated by packet-processing
      operations.  Depending on the underlying logic, such resources may
      be consumed, transformed, stored, or left unchanged.  The payload
      is not required to be strictly tied to the immediate communication
      objective identified by the header, and may also include
      entanglement resources maintained to support subsequent operations
      or network-level optimization [CacCal26].

   The following ASCII diagram illustrates the conceptual structure of a
   quantum packet for documentation only.  The model is not limited to
   bipartite entanglement.

  +---------------------------------+----------------------------------+
  |       Quantum Header            |     Quantum Payload              |
  +---------------------------------+----------------------------------+
  |   - Quantum Address |A>         |  - Entangled qubits |e_i>        |
  |   - Optional metadata           |   (bipartite or multipartite)    |
  +---------------------------------+----------------------------------+

6.  Generalized Quantum Forwarding (GQF)

   End-to-end entanglement distribution can be logically divided into
   two distinct phases: routing and forwarding [AbaCub25].  Routing
   determines the entanglement path (or, more generally, an entanglement
   graph), according to the selected routing metric, while forwarding
   performs the quantum operations on the entangled resources required
   to sustain quantum connectivity.

   In classical networks, the forwarding logic follows a match-and-
   forward paradigm, where the destination address is extracted from the
   packet header and matched against the routing table.  In the Quantum
   Internet, this logic is generalized toward entanglement manipulation,
   enabling forwarding decisions that act directly on quantum states in
   accordance with quantum-native principles.







Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026               [Page 12]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


6.1.  Role within the Architecture

   Within the architecture, forwarding operations arise from the
   interaction between the QDP and the QCP, through the EDCs and ESPs:

   *  QCP provides control support for forwarding, by maintaining
      awareness of network connectivity, tracking entanglement
      resources, and by enforcing policies across ESPs.

   *  ESP performs the quantum operations required for forwarding based
      on locally available entanglement resources, packet-carried
      control information, and, when available, policies provided by the
      QCP.

   Forwarding decisions require the capability to operate directly on
   quantum identifiers.  This is enabled by the quantum header in the
   packet, which carries the quantum equivalent of the source address
   and destination address.

7.  Quantum-Native Principles

   This section extends the architectural principles provided in
   [RFC9340] by introducing a set of quantum-native principles that
   guide the design and operation of a scalable Quantum Internet.  These
   principles reflect the physical properties of entanglement and the
   architectural requirements arising from entanglement-driven
   networking.

   *  Entanglement Packet Switching.
      The architecture adopts an entanglement-packet switching paradigm,
      in which entangled bits (ebits) serve as the fundamental network
      units.  These ``quantum packets'' carry quantum correlations
      across network nodes.

   *  Explicit Plane Decoupling.
      The architecture explicitly separates the QDP from the QCP.  This
      decoupling is necessary for scalability, since the stateful and
      non-local nature of entanglement resources requires in-network
      operations and persistent state awareness.

   *  Quantum Addressing.
      The network logic adheres to a quantum-native control model
      grounded in the quantum addressing (QA), which serves as its
      logical abstraction.

   *  Stateful Core Network, Lightweight Edges.
      The network core -- formed by ESPs -- is inherently stateful.
      Conversely, edge nodes remain lightweight.



Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026               [Page 13]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


   *  Entanglement-Aware Metrics.
      Routing and orchestration decisions rely on entanglement-aware
      metrics, including fidelity, residual coherence time in quantum
      memories, entanglement purification overhead, and entanglement
      availability.

   *  Hybrid Control Coexistence.
      The architecture must support the coexistence of classical and
      quantum control planes.

8.  Routing Models and Repeater Realizations Support

   The architectural framework defined in this document is agnostic to
   both the specific routing model and quantum repeater generation
   adopted in an implementation.  The abstractions introduced by the
   QDP, the QCP, and QA are designed to remain valid across different
   operational regimes of entanglement generation and across different
   physical realizations of quantum repeaters.

8.1.  Routing-Model Agnosticism

   The QCP orchestrates entanglement resources while the QDP executes
   the underlying quantum operations.  This separation naturally
   accommodates different routing models, including regimes in which
   entanglement generation occurs proactively (i.e., independently of a
   specific request) as well as regimes in which it is triggered
   reactively in response to explicit service requests.

   In quantum routing, control decisions may precede the actual
   availability of entanglement.  This stems from the ephemeral nature
   of entanglement resources, which may be consumed by operations such
   as entanglement swapping or may decohere over time.  Accordingly, the
   architecture supports two complementary routing views:

   *  a physical-proximity view, driving hop-by-hop entanglement
      generation and distribution; and

   *  an entanglement-proximity view, reflecting the currently available
      entanglement connectivity and enabling routing and forwarding
      decisions.

   When a service requires entanglement connectivity, the QCP -- through
   the EDCs -- may either exploit already-established entanglement links
   or trigger additional link-level generation based on the physical-
   proximity view.  The resulting entanglement resources are then
   reflected in the entanglement-proximity view maintained by the
   control plane.  This mechanism applies independently of whether
   entanglement generation is proactive or reactive.



Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026               [Page 14]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


   QA plays a key role in enabling this flexibility.  QA is not
   envisioned as a routing-only mechanism and does not require
   preexisting entanglement.  Rather, QA provides a quantum-native
   control abstraction that enables the QCP to represent and operate on
   sets of candidate nodes, paths, or domains in a compact manner.  In
   particular, QA enables reasoning over potential connectivity before
   entanglement resources are instantiated, supporting scalable
   orchestration decisions such as which links to activate, which paths
   to provision, or which domains to involve in distributed
   coordination.

   GQF operates on the basis of the quantum identifiers encoded in the
   quantum packet header, allowing forwarding decisions to adapt
   naturally to different routing regimes.  For example, forwarding may
   exploit already available entanglement resources as indicated by the
   entanglement-proximity view, or trigger additional entanglement-
   generation procedures guided by the physical-proximity view when such
   resources are unavailable.  In both cases, the quantum header and QA
   abstractions provide the necessary information for GQF to apply the
   appropriate sequence of operations on the available entanglement
   resources.

8.2.  Repeater-Generation Agnosticism

   Within this architecture, a repeater is treated primarily as a
   network function rather than as a fixed network entity.  Accordingly,
   the architectural tenets remain invariant across repeater
   generations, while the physical mechanisms implemented in the QDP may
   evolve with technological progress.

   In first- and second-generation repeater networks, where bipartite
   entanglement generation, purification, and swapping are the dominant
   primitives, QA naturally indexes and operates on entanglement
   resources and entanglement-based connectivity.  The entanglement-
   proximity view maintained by the QCP reflects the dynamic overlay
   formed by these resources, while GQF implements the corresponding
   sequence of swapping and forwarding operations.

   In third-generation repeater networks, where quantum error correction
   and logical qubit transmission may become prevalent, the operational
   primitives evolve, and shared elementary link-level entanglement may
   no longer be the dominant abstraction.  In this regime, QA continues
   to provide a scalable control abstraction, but the entities it
   represents evolve from individual entanglement resources toward
   logical entanglement resources.  Nevertheless, the architectural
   separation between QDP and QCP, the role of EDCs in orchestration,
   and the forwarding logic expressed through GQF remain unchanged.




Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026               [Page 15]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


9.  Multi-Domain Routing and Forwarding

   While the future deployment structure of the Quantum Internet remains
   uncertain, it is reasonable to consider the possibility that, as the
   network scales, it may evolve toward a multi-domain environment
   composed of independently operated infrastructures, similarly to the
   classical Internet.  If such an evolution occurs, inter-domain
   routing and coordination would naturally arise.  The architectural
   tenets described in this document are sufficiently flexible to
   accommodate such a scenario.

   The following section therefore illustrates, as an example of the
   flexibility of the architectural abstractions, how the separation
   between QDP, QCP, and QA can support intra-domain and inter-domain
   routing and forwarding in a multi-domain deployment.  This discussion
   is intended to be illustrative rather than prescriptive.

9.1.  Intra- and Inter-Domain Routing

   In a large-scale deployment composed of multiple administrative
   domains, routing functionality naturally separates into intra-domain
   and inter-domain components, similarly to the distinction between
   Interior Gateway Protocols (IGPs) and Exterior Gateway Protocols
   (EGPs) in the classical Internet.

   Within each administrative domain, the QCP maintains the information
   required to populate ESP routing tables.  This intra-domain routing
   function maintains a consistent view of local ESP connectivity and
   distributes the corresponding forwarding policies across the domain.

   Across domains, routing information is exchanged between boundary
   ESPs belonging to different administrative domains.  Because inter-
   domain routing spans independently operated networks, it cannot rely
   on a single centralized controller [CalCac25].  Instead, routing
   information propagates through distributed coordination between
   domain-level controllers and gateway ESPs.

   Mechanisms inspired by classical inter-domain routing, such as BGP,
   may be envisioned to exchange reachability information and candidate
   paths across domains while preserving routing autonomy [Liu2024QBGP].
   However, in the quantum networking context, routing decisions must
   also account for the probabilistic nature of entanglement generation
   and the temporal fluctuations in the availability of entanglement
   resources.  This aligns naturally with the abstractions introduced in
   this document, where routing information may reference sets of
   candidate forwarding targets rather than a single deterministic next
   hop, allowing the control plane to reason about multiple potential
   nodes, paths and domains simultaneously.



Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026               [Page 16]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


   The QCP therefore combines two complementary roles:

   *  maintaining intra-domain and inter-domain entanglement-
      connectivity graph and populating ESP routing tables, and

   *  coordinating with peer controllers and/or gateway ESPs to exchange
      physical and entanglement reachability information across domains.

9.2.  Quantum Addressing

   As discussed in the previous section, rather than associating
   forwarding entries strictly with individual nodes, QA enables routing
   information to reference sets of nodes or candidate forwarding
   targets through quantum-state representations.

   This capability is particularly useful when the control plane must
   decide which resources should be maintained or generated, and how
   forwarding logic should be configured, even if end-to-end
   entanglement has not yet been established.  In this sense, QA
   provides a quantum-native abstraction to reason about entanglement
   connectivity and control actions independently of when entanglement
   generation occurs.

   In the context of inter-domain routing, QA can represent reachable
   nodes, domains, or established entanglement in a compact and
   expressive form and support coordination among federated or
   distributed EDC instances when disseminating reachability information
   or provisioning candidate paths.

9.3.  Quantum Forwarding

   Once routing information has been installed at ESPs, forwarding
   decisions are executed locally through GQF in the QDP.  Instead of
   matching classical address prefixes, ESPs evaluate forwarding rules
   defined over the quantum identifiers contained in the quantum packet
   header.  These rules determine how the ESP should manipulate locally
   available entanglement resources to progress the forwarding
   operation.  Upon receiving a forwarding request, an ESP consults its
   routing table and selects the appropriate next hop according to the
   installed policies.  The ESP then performs the quantum operations
   required to extend entanglement toward that next hop using locally
   available resources.  These operations may include generating
   elementary link-level entanglement with the next ESP or performing
   entanglement swapping using stored entangled qubits.







Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026               [Page 17]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


10.  Security Considerations

   As an Informational document, this draft does not propose any
   specific mechanisms to ensure security.  The security considerations
   provided in RFC9340 apply for this document as well.

11.  IANA Considerations

   This memo includes no requests to IANA.

12.  Acknowledgments

   This document is based on work funded by the European Union under
   Horizon Europe ERC-CoG grant QNattyNet, n.101169850.  Views and
   opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not
   necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European
   Research Council Executive Agency.  Neither the European Union nor
   the granting authority can be held responsible for them.

13.  Informative References

   [RFC9340]  Kozlowski, W., Wehner, S., Van Meter, R., Rijsman, B.,
              Cacciapuoti, A. S., Caleffi, M., and S. Nagayama,
              "Architectural Principles for a Quantum Internet",
              RFC 9340, DOI 10.17487/RFC9340, March 2023,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9340>.

   [QI-MULTIPLANE]
              Lopez, D., Martin, V., Lopez, B., and L. M. Contreras, "A
              Multiplane Architecture Proposal for the Quantum
              Internet", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-irtf-
              qirg-qi-multiplane-arch-01, February 2026,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-qirg-qi-
              multiplane-arch/01/>.

   [CalCac25] Caleffi, M. and A. S. Cacciapuoti, "Quantum Internet
              Architecture: unlocking Quantum-Native Routing via Quantum
              Addressing", IEEE Transactions on Communications 74,
              DOI 10.1109/tcomm.2025.3650397, 2026,
              <http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TCOMM.2025.3650397>.  Invited
              Paper.

   [CacCal26] Cacciapuoti, A. S. and M. Caleffi, "A Quantum Internet
              Protocol Suite: Beyond Layering", IEEE Transactions on
              Network Science and Engineering 2026,
              DOI 10.1109/TNSE.2026.3679795, 2026,
              <https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSE.2026.3679795>.  Invited
              Paper.



Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026               [Page 18]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


   [IllCal22] Illiano, J., Caleffi, M., Manzalini, A., and A. S.
              Cacciapuoti, "Quantum Internet Protocol Stack: a
              Comprehensive Survey", August 2022,
              <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/
              S1389128622002250>.

   [RFC1958]  Carpenter, B., "Architectural Principles of the Internet",
              RFC 1958, 1996, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1958>.

   [RFC3439]  Bush, R. and D. Meyer, "Some Internet Architectural
              Guidelines and Philosophy", RFC 3439, 2002,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3439>.

   [AbaCub25] Abane, A., Cubeddu, M., Mai, V. S., and A. Battou,
              "Entanglement routing in quantum networks: A comprehensive
              survey", IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering 2025,
              2025, <10.1109/TQE.2025.3541123>.

   [KreRam14] Kreutz, D., Ramos, F. M. V., Verissimo, P. E., Rothenberg,
              C. E., Azodolmolky, S., and S. Uhlig, "Software-defined
              networking: A comprehensive survey", Proceedings of the
              IEEE 2014, 2014, <10.1109/JPROC.2014.2371999>.

   [yang2004rfc3746]
              Yang, L., Dantu, R., Anderson, T., and R. Gopal,
              "Forwarding and Control Element Separation (ForCES)
              Framework", 2004.

   [KurRos10] Kurose, J. and K. Ross, "Computer Networks: A Top-Down
              Approach", 2010.

   [KriCla07] Krioukov, D., Claffy, K. C., Fall, K., and A. Brady, "On
              compact routing for the Internet", SIGCOMM Computer
              Communication Review 37, 2007,
              <https://doi.org/10.1145/1273445.1273450>.

   [Liu2024QBGP]
              Liu, M., Li, Z., Cai, K., Allcock, J., Zhang, S., and J.
              C. S. Lui, "Quantum BGP with Online Path Selection via
              Network Benchmarking", IEEE INFOCOM 2024,
              DOI 10.1109/INFOCOM52122.2024.10621359, 2024,
              <https://doi.org/10.1109/INFOCOM52122.2024.10621359>.

Authors' Addresses

   A. S. Cacciapuoti
   University of Naples Federico II
   Email: angelasara.cacciapuoti@unina.it



Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026               [Page 19]

Internet-Draft   Quantum-Native Architectural Tenets and      April 2026


   M. Caleffi
   University of Naples Federico II
   Email: marcello.caleffi@unina.it


   J. Illiano
   University of Naples Federico II
   Email: jessica.illiano@unina.it


   C. De Risi
   University of Naples Federico II
   Email: caterina.derisi@unina.it


   A. Abane
   National Institute of Standards and Technology
   Email: amar.abane@nist.gov


   J. Chung
   Argonne National Laboratory -- Data Science and Learning Division
   Email: chungmiranda@anl.gov




























Cacciapuoti, et al.      Expires 22 October 2026               [Page 20]
