



Network Working Group                                   C. Kerrison, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                              1 April 2026
Intended status: Informational                                          
Expires: 3 October 2026


               Representation of Intricate Communications
            draft-kerrison-representation-intricate-comms-00

Abstract

   Complex inter-party communication or relationship dynamics can be
   implied within the use of more structured protocols.  This document
   proposes a compact binary representation for describing these
   dynamics in a non-protocol-binding manner that can be readily
   converted back to a readable format and provide additional context
   for implementers.

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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 3 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.  Code Components
   extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.



Kerrison                 Expires 3 October 2026                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft      Representation of Intricate Comms         April 2026


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     Distribution  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Relationship Representation and Bitstream Encoding  . . . . .   2
   3.  Lexicon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Separator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.2.  Nouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.3.  Verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.4.  Adjectives  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Encoding and Decoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  Example Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Extended Example  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Conclusion  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Indirect Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   The role of this document is to address complex inter-party
   communication or relationship dynamics in systems, where there may be
   compliance with a technical specification or protocol but where there
   are additional conventions or semantics which fall outside of the
   scope of application layer protocols.

   This document proposes a common lexicon and compact binary
   representation for describing these dynamics in a non-protocol-
   binding manner that can be readily converted back to a readable
   format and provide additional context for implementers.

Distribution

   This memo is submitted for informational purposes within the IETF
   community.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

2.  Relationship Representation and Bitstream Encoding

   A series of high-level statements about the relationship maintained
   between the two parties will first be created using a limited
   lexicon.  While this may reduce the apparent flexibility of the
   model, an example will be provided later to demonstrate the
   flexibility of this approach.  Through a reversible mapping of this
   lexicon to known length bit patterns, a continuous high-density
   bitstream can be used to represent these complex relationships in a
   manner that reduces overhead.  In all following examples, bit
   patterns should be read left to right.



Kerrison                 Expires 3 October 2026                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft      Representation of Intricate Comms         April 2026


3.  Lexicon

   These terms allow a flexible representation of the relationship
   between parties, and were selected to allow encoding of complex
   relationships.  The lexicon is divided into four categories:
   Separators, Nouns, Verbs, and Adjectives.

3.1.  Separator

   The separator token is encoded using the bit pattern 00.  Separators
   may be used to terminate statements, provide structural boundaries,
   or introduce intentional pauses.  When multiple separators appear
   consecutively, the first is interpreted as a statement boundary,
   while subsequent occurrences are treated as placeholders or extended
   pauses for emphasis.

   *  00 — Separator

3.2.  Nouns

   Nouns are encoded using the bit prefix 01 followed by four additional
   bits that identify the specific semantic token.

   *  01 0000 — Transmitting Party

   *  01 0001 — Receiving Party

   *  01 0010 — Both Parties

   *  01 0011 — Internal State

   *  01 0100 — Connection/Communication

   *  01 0101 — Protocol Specification

   *  01 0110 — Malintent

   *  01 0111 — Sequence/History

   *  01 1000 — Application

   *  01 1001 — Operation

   *  01 1010 — Heuristic

   *  01 1011 — Reserved

   *  01 11xx — Illegal or malformed noun



Kerrison                 Expires 3 October 2026                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft      Representation of Intricate Comms         April 2026


3.3.  Verbs

   Verbs are encoded using the bit prefix 10.  These tokens describe
   actions, intentions, or operational semantics between the parties.

   *  10 0000 — Connect/Transmit

   *  10 0001 — Disconnect

   *  10 0010 — Propose/Consider

   *  10 0011 — Know/Comprehend/Agree

   *  10 0100 — Option/Choice

   *  10 0101 — Must

   *  10 0110 — Will Not

   *  10 0111 — Drop

   *  10 1000 — Iterate

   *  10 1001 — Ignore

   *  10 1010 — Intend

   *  10 1011 — Fabricate

   *  10 1100 — Damage/Impact

   *  10 1101 — Execute

   *  10 1110 — Also (Adverb)

   *  10 1111 — Receive

3.4.  Adjectives

   Adjectives are encoded using the bit prefix 11.  These tokens modify
   or qualify nouns or verbs within the relationship description.

   *  11 0000 — Established

   *  11 0001 — Complete

   *  11 0010 — Not Available




Kerrison                 Expires 3 October 2026                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft      Representation of Intricate Comms         April 2026


   *  11 0011 — Other

   *  11 0100 — No Time

   *  11 0101 — Short Time

   *  11 0110 — Moderate Time

   *  11 0111 — Long Time

   *  11 1000 — Reluctant

   *  11 1001 — Unable

   *  11 1010 — Obscured

   *  11 1011 — Previous Object

   *  11 11xx — Illegal or malformed adjective

4.  Encoding and Decoding

   Encoding is performed as an append operation, adding the bit pattern
   for the new token to the end of the stream.

   Decoding is performed by taking the preamble of each new token, a
   2-bit pattern, to classify which portion of the lexicon is being
   used.  The token is either handled as a separator or the next 4 bits
   are read to index into the lexicon subset.  Overall only a pointer
   into the bytestream and a count of recently decoded separators are
   required state to cleanly decode a well-formed bitstream.

4.1.  Example Statement

   The following shows a statement about the relationship between both
   parties encoded into a bitstream.

   Whitespace in the encoded form is for readability only and does not
   appear in the actual bitstream.

   Example (human-readable form):

   [Both Parties] [Must] [Know/Comprehend/Agree] [Protocol
   Specification] [Separator]

   Encoded bitstream:

   01 0010 10 0101 10 0011 01 0101 00



Kerrison                 Expires 3 October 2026                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft      Representation of Intricate Comms         April 2026


5.  Extended Example

   Much longer descriptions of the dynamic between two nodes expected to
   communicate can be represented in hexadecimal form.  The following
   example shows a complete encoded relationship description, with four
   additional separators appended to ensure byte alignment.

    4a35d5118d5b90318d088466bfbcd010aa04c96d4630d11461344519cd11a2944d1146db0d1182134460aec444a3cf7114ec466804d28c4a3612b7b244609104c9918119a3d1181184d118119cd11a2944d1146db0d1182134460aec44d11461344519cd11a2944d1146db0d1182134460aec4408118408118434460d1180811840d1183446020461128f3dc453b119a0134a3128d84adec42a81325b518c3445184d1146734468a5134451b6c3446084d1182bb11

6.  Conclusion

   The sample generated above demonstrates a description of
   communication dynamics first translated from plain English into
   lexicon tokens then into bitstream representation.  The original
   representation consisted of 2106 bytes of Unicode text.  In this
   compact representation, only 182 bytes were needed to represent the
   communication.  Further, this improved even on the deflated size for
   the English/Unicode representation of 397 bytes.  These results
   highlight the efficiency of the encoding model, particularly for
   verbose descriptions of inter-party dynamics.

   While the lexicon is intentionally limited, the examples illustrate
   that it is expressive enough to capture a wide range of relationship
   semantics.  The reversible mapping to fixed-length bit patterns
   ensures that encoded streams remain compact, unambiguous, and
   straightforward to decode.  This approach may be applicable to
   systems where communication patterns, expectations, or behavioral
   conventions must be conveyed alongside or outside of traditional
   protocol structures.

7.  IANA Considerations

   This memo includes no request to IANA.

8.  Security Considerations

   This document should not affect the security of the Internet.

Indirect Contributors

   The author acknowledges the indirect influence of works created by M.
   Stock, M.  Aitken, and P.  Waterman, which informed aspects of the
   extended example.  These individuals did not participate in the
   preparation or submission of this document.

Author's Address

   Clinton Kerrison (editor)



Kerrison                 Expires 3 October 2026                 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft      Representation of Intricate Comms         April 2026


   Email: aussieklutz@gmail.com


















































Kerrison                 Expires 3 October 2026                 [Page 7]
