



QIRG                                                        R. Van Meter
Internet-Draft                                        N. Benchasattabuse
Intended status: Informational                             A. Taherkhani
Expires: 17 September 2026                               Keio University
                                                           16 March 2026


                     A Quantum Network Architecture
          draft-van-meter-qirg-quantum-network-architecture-00

Abstract

   This quantum network architecture defines a set of planes providing
   different views of the network, supporting different responsibilities
   and modes of operation; a set of device, node and link types; some
   network topologies, deployment scenarios and their relationship to
   applications; and key design decisions as a result of corresponding
   requirements.

About This Document

   This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

   The latest revision of this draft can be found at https://moonshot-
   nagayama-pj.github.io/draft-van-meter-qirg-quantum-network-
   architecture/draft-van-meter-qirg-quantum-network-architecture.html.
   Status information for this document may be found at
   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-van-meter-qirg-quantum-
   network-architecture/.

   Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
   https://github.com/moonshot-nagayama-pj/draft-van-meter-qirg-quantum-
   network-architecture.

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."



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026               [Page 1]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   This Internet-Draft will expire on 17 September 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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Goals and Non-Goals of this Document  . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.2.  Non-Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Relationship to Documents by Other Organizations  . . . . . .   5
   5.  Prerequisite Knowledge  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   7.  Applications of Networks  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     7.1.  Types of Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     7.2.  Entangled States Consumption Patterns . . . . . . . . . .  10
       7.2.1.  The Entanglement Information Timeline . . . . . . . .  11
       7.2.2.  Classification of Consumption Patterns  . . . . . . .  11
       7.2.3.  Class Selection and Resource Implications . . . . . .  12
       7.2.4.  Unentangled State Tolerant (B Class) Applications . .  13
       7.2.5.  Reactive Correction (C Class) Applications  . . . . .  13
       7.2.6.  Deterministic (T Class) Applications  . . . . . . . .  14
   8.  Architectural Concepts  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     8.1.  Quantum Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     8.2.  Quantum Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     8.3.  Quantum Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     8.4.  Photonic Synchronization Domains  . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     8.5.  Direct and Indirect Multicomputer Architectures . . . . .  15
     8.6.  Detector-centric Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     8.7.  Source-centric Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   9.  A Sketch of the System Model  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     9.1.  Multicomputer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     9.2.  Data Center Network (QDCN)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
     9.3.  Local-Area Network (QLAN) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
     9.4.  Wide-Area Network (QWAN)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   10. Quantum Optical Building Blocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
     10.1.  Qubits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
     10.2.  Photons, Wave Packets and Optical Modes  . . . . . . . .  21



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026               [Page 2]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


     10.3.  Photonic Qubits  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
     10.4.  Memories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
     10.5.  Photon Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
       10.5.1.  Unentangled Single Photons . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
       10.5.2.  Entangled Photon Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
       10.5.3.  Memory-Emitted Photons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     10.6.  Detectors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   11. Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     11.1.  General Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
       11.1.1.  Functional Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
       11.1.2.  Interface Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
       11.1.3.  Physical Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
       11.1.4.  Environmental Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
     11.2.  Network Management Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
       11.2.1.  Fault Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
       11.2.2.  Configuration Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
   12. Top Level Architecture  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
     12.1.  Deterministic Classical Control of Quantum States  . . .  24
   13. Communication Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
   14. Architectural Planes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     14.1.  Quantum  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     14.2.  Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     14.3.  Control  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  27
     14.4.  Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  27
   15. Protocol Layers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  27
   16. Nodes and Node Types  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28
     16.1.  End Nodes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28
     16.2.  Support Nodes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  30
     16.3.  Repeater Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  31
     16.4.  Composite Nodes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32
   17. Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32
     17.1.  The Link Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32
     17.2.  Photonic Path Description  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32
     17.3.  Point-to-point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  33
     17.4.  Switched . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  33
     17.5.  Multidrop or Bus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  33
   18. Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  34
   19. Resource Management: Multiplexing and Routing . . . . . . . .  34
   20. Classical Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  34
     20.1.  Quantum Plane  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  34
     20.2.  Control Plane  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  35
     20.3.  Data Plane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  35
     20.4.  Management plane: Node and link management . . . . . . .  35
     20.5.  Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  35
   21. Naming and Addressing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  35
     21.1.  State naming and management in RuleSets  . . . . . . . .  36
   22. Example Networks  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  37
     22.1.  Fully Connected  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  37



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026               [Page 3]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


     22.2.  Q-Fly Multicomputer  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  37
     22.3.  Optically Switched Fat Tree  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  38
     22.4.  Repeater Fat Tree  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  38
     22.5.  2-D Grid Multicomputer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  38
     22.6.  Ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  39
     22.7.  QLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  39
   23. APIs for Network Service ("Quantum Sockets")  . . . . . . . .  39
   24. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  39
   25. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  39
     25.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  39
     25.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  40
   Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  51
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  53

1.  Introduction

   This document introduces the key architectural decisions, classical
   and quantum communication systems, and main node types for several
   classes of quantum networks.

   We define the verb _to architect_ as: within a set of environmental
   constraints, using a set of building blocks, design a system that
   satisfies a need, elegantly and economically.  We use the noun
   _architecture_ as: the set of blocks or subsystems, their roles and
   their interfaces and their overall arrangement, that defines the
   system.  This architecture defines the overall structure, and is
   connected to a specific implementation as an example.

   For a description of the key concepts in quantum networks and
   additional references, see [RFC9340] and the book _Quantum
   Communications_ [hajdusek-qcomm].

   For more background and discussion of the design choices in this
   architecture, see the Ph.D. dissertation of Naphan Benchasattabuse
   [res-mgmt-het].

2.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
   BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

3.  Goals and Non-Goals of this Document

   This section describes goals and non-goals for this document itself,
   rather than the technical goals and requirements for a network.



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026               [Page 4]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


3.1.  Goals

   *  To define the principal concepts in a quantum network, principally
      for quantum multicomputer interconnects but also data center and
      wide-area networks where possible.

   *  To enumerate some of the key architectural decisions for this
      architecture.

   *  To describe how device, link and node types are defined.

   *  To provide a guide to other documents.

3.2.  Non-Goals

   *  Internetworking

4.  Relationship to Documents by Other Organizations

   Other organizations, including national laboratories and standards
   development organizations, are developing documents describing
   quantum networks and quantum computing technology.  These are mostly
   _pre-standardization_ documents, not yet on any formal
   standardization track.  To the extent possible, this document
   conforms to their terminology.  However, as this document describes a
   specific quantum network architecture, it does not attempt to conform
   to specific design decisions made in other contexts.  See an August
   2025 Science Policy Forum [aboy-governance] for additional discussion
   of some standardization efforts and their value.

   Some of these are listed here for reference:

   *  ETSI

      -  Industry Specification Group (ISG) on Quantum Key Distribution
         (QKD) (https://www.etsi.org/committee/qkd)

   *  IEEE Standards Association

      -  IEEE Standards & Projects for Quantum Technologies
         (https://standards.ieee.org/initiatives/quantum-standards-
         activities/)

      -  Standardization Roadmap on Quantum Applications (https://ieee-
         sa.imeetcentral.com/p/eAAAAAAASqm9AAAAAFU6etg)

   *  ISO




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026               [Page 5]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


      -  IEC/ISO JTC 3 Quantum technologies (https://www.iso.org/
         committee/10138914.html)

   *  ITU-T

      -  ITU-T Focus Group on Quantum Information Technology for
         Networks (FG-QIT4N) (https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-
         T/focusgroups/qit4n/Pages/default.aspx)

      -  Y.3800 series (https://www.itu.int/itu-t/recommendations/
         index.aspx?ser=Y) on quantum key distribution networks

   *  National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

      -  Single-Photon Sources and Detectors Dictionary [nist-singles]

   *  Quantum Internet Research Group (QIRG)
      (https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/qirg/about/) (part of IRTF)

      -  [RFC9340]

      -  [RFC9583]

5.  Prerequisite Knowledge

   This document assumes basic knowledge of the underlying technology
   and goals of quantum communications.  The following list of topics
   may help readers who are not yet familiar with the concepts.

   *  Linear algebra

   *  Quantum information basics

      -  Dirac ket notation

      -  von Neumann density matrix notation

      -  Superposition

      -  Entanglement

      -  Interference

      -  Unitary operation

      -  Measurement

      -  Decoherence



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026               [Page 6]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


      -  No-cloning theorem

      -  Clifford group

      -  Basics of quantum error correction (QEC)

   *  Classical Internet-family networking

   *  Quantum networking

      -  Teleportation

      -  Purification

      -  Entanglement swapping

      -  Quantum key distribution: BB84, E91, BBM92

      -  "Generations" of quantum repeaters

      -  (Repeater graph states may be helpful, but are not used in the
         current architecture)

   Because terms such as _fidelity_ have varying definitions, they will
   be defined in this set of documents (where?  Timing Regimes?).

   Readers needing additional background are referred to:

   *  [RFC9340]

   *  [RFC9583]

   *  Van Meter, _Quantum Networking_ [van-meter-q-net-book]

   *  Hajdusek and Van Meter, _Quantum Communications_ [hajdusek-qcomm]

6.  Terminology

   In this document, we use the abbreviations and other related
   technical terms listed in the following table:

   +=================+================================================+
   | Term            | Description                                    |
   +=================+================================================+
   | BSA             | Bell state analyzer, generally optical and     |
   |                 | incorporating one or more beamsplitters and    |
   |                 | either two or four single-photon detectors     |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026               [Page 7]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   | device          | manipulates photons in some fashion; a         |
   |                 | component of a node                            |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | FASQ            | fault-tolerant application-scale quantum       |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | fidelity        | measures how close a quantum state is to the   |
   |                 | state we have tried to create.  Varies between |
   |                 | 0 and 1, with unit fidelity indicating the     |
   |                 | actual state is the same as the desired state. |
   |                 | It expresses the probability that the state    |
   |                 | will behave exactly the same as our desired    |
   |                 | state. (adapted from RFC 9340)                 |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | group switch    | In the Q-Fly architecture, the set of devices  |
   |                 | that connect the end nodes to the pool of      |
   |                 | BSAs, and the group to other groups            |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | NISQ            | near-term intermediate-scale quantum           |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | node            | a self-contained subsystem with a clear        |
   |                 | boundary that is visible to other such nodes   |
   |                 | as a single entity on one or more planes       |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | optical mode    | roughly, a place and time that a photon might  |
   |                 | be, which may be occupied by some, all or none |
   |                 | of the amplitude of a single photon.  More     |
   |                 | accurately, it is a field distribution         |
   |                 | obtained from solving Maxwell's equations      |
   |                 | given some boundary conditions.  An optical    |
   |                 | mode is an eigensolution of the wave equation  |
   |                 | given the physical properties of the waveguide |
   |                 | (dimensions, refractive index).  It is a       |
   |                 | particular field distribution that can         |
   |                 | propagate through the waveguide.  The state of |
   |                 | a single photon can be expressed as a coherent |
   |                 | superposition of such optical modes.  For      |
   |                 | optics engineers, a 'mode' (or optical mode to |
   |                 | be more precise) refers to a specific          |
   |                 | spatiotemporal distribution of electromagnetic |
   |                 | field fluctuation.  For quantum network        |
   |                 | engineers, especially those that would most    |
   |                 | likely be reading RFCs, two optical detectors  |
   |                 | are detecting different optical modes if one   |
   |                 | detector can be activated by light without     |
   |                 | activating the other.  In that case, it is not |
   |                 | wrong to say that the two detectors are        |
   |                 | detecting two independent optical modes.       |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026               [Page 8]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   | path            | the set of nodes and links that a connection   |
   |                 | passes through, including the end points       |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | plane           | a view of the entire network for a particular  |
   | (architectural) | purpose, such as management or data            |
   |                 | transmission                                   |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | plane (optical) | a defined plane in physical space through      |
   |                 | which a photon passes; also referred to as a   |
   |                 | surface                                        |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | QBER            | quantum bit error rate                         |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | QNIC            | quantum network interface card; in practice,   |
   |                 | the physical interface to a link plus the set  |
   |                 | of quantum memories under the control of the   |
   |                 | network stack.                                 |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | QPU             | quantum processing unit                        |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | RuleSet         | a set of SDN-inspired, event-driven, short,    |
   |                 | real-time or near-real time, near-             |
   |                 | determininistic programs executed at nodes     |
   |                 | along a path to build application-requested    |
   |                 | entangled states                               |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | SNSPD           | Superconducting Nanowire Single Photon         |
   |                 | Detector                                       |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | multiqubit      | tensor product of Pauli operators acting on    |
   | Pauli operators | two or more qubits                             |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | switch point    | a 2x2 junction that can be either X (cross) or |
   |                 | = (straight)                                   |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | switch device   | a single integrated, fiber- or free space-     |
   |                 | connected (physical) component, comprising one |
   |                 | or more switch points                          |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | teledata        | application execution via teleporting data     |
   |                 | from node to node, then executing gates        |
   |                 | locally.  May be done remotely, mediated by    |
   |                 | Bell pairs.                                    |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | telegate        | application execution via remote gates (as     |
   |                 | defined by Eisert et al.).  May be done        |
   |                 | remotely, mediated by Bell pairs.              |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026               [Page 9]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   | time bin        | compare to window and time slot                |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | time slot       | compare to window and time bin                 |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+
   | window          | compare to time bin and time slot              |
   +-----------------+------------------------------------------------+

                                 Table 1

7.  Applications of Networks

   The requirements for a network are determined by the application
   workload.  This section orients architectural decisions by briefly
   introducing applications and the communication patterns they exhibit,
   which is a key factor determining the suitability of particular
   architectures.

7.1.  Types of Applications

   Applications fall into two large categories: inherently distributed
   applications, or subdivision of monolithic applications for
   distributed execution, as in supercomputing applications running on
   multicomputer architectures.

   For a discussion of some inherently distributed applications of
   quantum networks, see [RFC9583].  This network architecture supports
   the applications listed in that RFC, though not all networks will
   support all applications.

7.2.  Entangled States Consumption Patterns

   (Adapted and extended from unpublished text in
   [van-meter-opt-timing].)

   Distinct from the classification of quantum repeater generations by
   Muralidharan et al. [muralidharan-generations], one can categorize
   distributed quantum systems by how applications interface with the
   network; specifically, the timing at which network interface qubits
   are freed after attempting entangled state generation.

   In the early days of quantum information research, Bennett et al.
   recognized [bennett-mixed] that the component qubits of an entangled
   state may be held at different times in different locations, termed
   _time-separated Bell pairs_. Based on this principle, we can describe
   the timeline of information availability between two nodes.  This
   model assumes entangled states are requested dynamically during
   execution, rather than pre-caching entangled
   states　[schoute-shortcuts] for immediate consumption.



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 10]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


7.2.1.  The Entanglement Information Timeline

   The lifecycle of an entanglement request, from initiation to full
   state knowledge, follows three distinct stages:

   1.  *Attempt:* The entangled states are requested.  For memory-based
       links, this corresponds to the quantum memory emitting a photon
       and transmitting it through the link.

   2.  *Heralded:* The entangled states are physically established, but
       the specific states are unknown.  The node has received
       confirmations that photons arrived at the BSA and the BSM
       succeeded, but the Pauli frame information is not yet available.

   3.  *Correct:* The classical message regarding the Pauli frame
       arrives.  The node now knows the exact entangled state created
       and can apply corrections (or software frame updates) to align
       with the expected state.

7.2.2.  Classification of Consumption Patterns

   Based on the timeline above, we classify Bell pair consumption into
   three classes [van-meter-opt-timing].  These classes are defined by
   whether the application must *block execution* while waiting for
   information at the _Heralded_ or _Correct_ stages.  Note that the
   term "blocking" here refers to the blocking versus non-blocking
   execution models, similar to kernel-level I/O blocking or the event-
   driven programming paradigm, and is distinct from the concept of
   blocking in network switches.






















Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 11]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   +================+============+========+===========================+
   | Class          | Wait for   | Wait   | Application Behavior      |
   |                | Heralding? | for    |                           |
   |                |            | Pauli  |                           |
   |                |            | Frame? |                           |
   +================+============+========+===========================+
   | *Unentangled   | No         | No     | *Non-Blocking:* The       |
   | State Tolerant |            |        | application consumes the  |
   | (B)*           |            |        | qubit immediately,        |
   |                |            |        | handling failures or      |
   |                |            |        | corrections in post-      |
   |                |            |        | processing.               |
   +----------------+------------+--------+---------------------------+
   | *Reactive      | Yes*       | No     | *Partially Blocking:* The |
   | Correction     |            |        | application waits only    |
   | (C)*           |            |        | for confirmation of       |
   |                |            |        | existence (heralding),    |
   |                |            |        | then proceeds by tracking |
   |                |            |        | errors in software.       |
   +----------------+------------+--------+---------------------------+
   | *Deterministic | Yes        | Yes    | *Strictly Blocking:* The  |
   | (T)*           |            |        | application blocks until  |
   |                |            |        | the state is fully        |
   |                |            |        | verified and corrected.   |
   +----------------+------------+--------+---------------------------+

                                 Table 2

   _*Note for Class C: If the link is fully deterministic (guaranteeing
   success), the application does not need to pause for heralding and
   become non-blocking._

7.2.3.  Class Selection and Resource Implications

   It is important to note that these classes are determined by the
   *nodes*, not the network.  The application nodes assess their own
   capabilities (number of buffer memories, gate and qubit error rate)
   and the network's performance (fidelity, rate, success probability)
   to select the appropriate operating class.












Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 12]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   The selection of a class significantly impacts network resource
   utilization.  For example, if a node possesses sufficient buffer
   memory, it may elect to operate in *Class B* from the perspective of
   the network interface.  By moving the entangled state from the
   communication qubit to storage immediately (or measuring it
   immediately), the node frees up the network interface to service
   other requests.  This reduces the workload on the network and
   increases the repetition rate, even if the application logic itself
   eventually requires the data for a Class T operation.

7.2.4.  Unentangled State Tolerant (B Class) Applications

   The defining characteristic of B Class applications is the ability to
   consume the (potential) entangled states immediately without waiting
   (fully non-blocking).  The application effectively takes over the
   burden of validation from the network.

   *Execution Flow:* The application does not stop.  It measures or
   stores the qubit immediately.  If the entanglement attempt failed
   (information received later), the data is discarded or treated as an
   erasure error.

   *Examples:*

   *  *Classical Correlation:* Applications like Quantum Key
      Distribution (QKD) protocols (e.g., E91) or link fidelity
      estimation.  The application filters out failed attempts during
      classical post-processing.

   *  *Fault-Tolerant Operations:* Certain remote quantum error
      correction schemes, such as remote lattice surgery
      [horsman-lattice-surgery], [ramette-remote], [leone-remote],
      [sinclair-ft-interconnect] of the surface code.  If the
      probability of creating a link is high enough, unsuccessful
      attempts can be treated as depolarizing errors, which the logical
      code can tolerate without stalling the pipeline.

7.2.5.  Reactive Correction (C Class) Applications

   In C Class applications, the system requires confirmation that a link
   exists, but does not wait for the state details.  The application
   proceeds by assuming a specific Bell state and managing deviations
   via software tracking.

   *Execution Flow:* The application pauses briefly to ensure the Bell
   pair is _Heralded_. Once confirmed, it executes immediately.  It does
   not wait for the _Correct_ stage (Pauli frame); instead, it uses a
   "Pauli Frame Tracker" to propagate the necessary corrections through



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 13]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   the circuit virtually.  If the network link is deterministic, the
   specific wait for heralding is removed, as the node assumes success
   by default.

   *Examples:* Clifford circuit execution, distributed Pauli-based
   computation with time-optimal scheme [litinski-gosc], and state
   teleportation.

7.2.6.  Deterministic (T Class) Applications

   T Class applications impose the strictest timing constraints,
   requiring the entangled state to idle the longest before being
   consumed.

   *Execution Flow:* The application *completely stalls*. It must wait
   until the network provides both the confirmation of creation
   (_Heralded_) and the specific state information (_Correct_).
   Execution only resumes once the exact state is known or corrected.

   *Examples:* Execution of circuits involving non-Clifford gates.
   While non-Clifford operations _can_ theoretically be corrected post
   hoc (similar to Class C), doing so often requires consuming
   _additional_ entangled states to fix the error.  Since consuming
   extra resources is more costly than waiting, these operations default
   to Class T to ensure the state is correct before proceeding.

8.  Architectural Concepts

   This section introduces concepts in classical and quantum computer
   and network architecture that may be unfamiliar, or that have a
   specific role in this network architecture.

8.1.  Quantum Devices

   A quantum device stores, carries, measures or computes on quantum
   variables.

   A quantum device (often shortened to just "device" in this
   specification) is under software control; i.e. optical fibers or beam
   splitters are not classified as quantum devices.

   Control of devices is usually done with respect to some physical
   characteristic of the device itself, rather than dealing with the
   abstract notion of qubits.  A controllable wave plate, for example,
   may be adjusted in units of degrees of rotation of the plate.  An
   example of a software package that provides such functionality is
   PnPQ.




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 14]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


8.2.  Quantum Nodes

   A node comprises one or more quantum devices, and serves as a single
   locus of control for network protocols.  The classes of nodes are
   described later in this document.

8.3.  Quantum Links

   Links are described in Section 17.

8.4.  Photonic Synchronization Domains

   A photonic synchronization domain (PSD) is the range of devices and
   fibers over which photons must be controlled with high precision in
   order to effect e.g. photonic entanglement swapping [mori-psds].  The
   primary concern of a PSD is getting photons to arrive at
   beamsplitters "simultaneously", with sufficient overlap, as specified
   in [I-D.draft-hajdusek-qirg-timing-physics].

8.5.  Direct and Indirect Multicomputer Architectures

   In multicomputer architectures, a _direct_ architecture features
   links that go directly from computational node to computational node.
   Hypercubes, meshes and toruses are typically direct architectures.
   An _indirect_ architecture interposes one or more switches between
   computational nodes.  Fat trees, Clos and Benes networks, and the
   various -fly topologies are generally indirect [dally-towles].

   The distinction is somewhat artificial in that direct architectures
   sometimes incorporate a small switch inside the node, in which case
   the matching term depends on where you draw the boundary of the node,
   and because computational nodes can be configured to act only as
   routers within the network, modeling an indirect architecture using
   direct hardware.

8.6.  Detector-centric Architecture

   Several detectors may be packaged as a single subsystem for purposes
   such as cooling, power, control and time stamping.  An architecture
   built around a shared pool of detectors is a _detector-centric
   architecture_. This structure facilities entanglement distribution in
   a quantum system interconnect, data center network or some forms of
   local area network.

   A detector-centric architecture is an indirect architecture if the
   pool of detectors is behind a switch or network of switches.





Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 15]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


8.7.  Source-centric Architecture

   Many of the detector-centric network topologies can be inverted, such
   that the pool of detectors is replaced by a pool of entangled photon
   pair sources.  The network then is used to distribute entanglement,
   with the photons measured, absorbed into memories, interfered with
   locally generated photons, or otherwise utilized at or near the end
   nodes.  Such a network was proposed by Drost _et al._ [drost].

9.  A Sketch of the System Model

   As noted in the 2022 roadmap for quantum interconnects
   [awschalom-roadmap], entangled quantum network technology can be
   deployed in a variety of scenarios with different requirements and
   assumptions.  A full description of each of these is delegated to
   other documents, but a brief description here will help to orient
   discussions of design points in order to justify certain decisions.

9.1.  Multicomputer

   The first deployment of production-level, distant quantum
   entanglement is likely to be in a _quantum multicomputer_, based on
   the same principles as classical distributed-memory supercomputers
   from the Caltech Cosmic Cube (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
   Caltech_Cosmic_Cube) to Fugaku (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
   Fugaku_(supercomputer)) [rdv-thesis].  Multicomputer deployments will
   likely involve computational nodes, optical switches, Bell state
   analyzers, and possibly entangled photon pair sources (all defined
   below).  Quantum repeaters with memory are less likely to be deployed
   in multicomputers, though one such architecture [choi-fat-tree] has
   been proposed.  Because the current technology roadmaps favor this
   type of deployment, where design choices are in conflict or unclear,
   multicomputer designs are given priority over wide-area networks in
   this set of specifications.

   The execution model is expected to be much like the classical
   supercomputing Message Passing Interface (MPI)
   (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message_Passing_Interface).

   General hardware environment:

   *  A multicomputer consists of a set of quantum nodes that are
      connected via quantum optical channels.  The system may be either
      a direct (point-to-point, end node-to-end node) or an indirect
      (switched) design.

   *  Every quantum node has a set of quantum devices and a classical
      controller.



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 16]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   *  End nodes are generally computational nodes, but measurement-only,
      sensor, and specialized memory storage nodes may be included.

   *  End nodes are capable of running application programs as well as
      executing the minimum operations to build end-to-end entangled
      states.

   *  End nodes may be built using multi-level hardware interconnects;
      when gates between physically distant qubits are mediated by first
      creating shared entangled states, the creation of those entangled
      states is the responsibility of the network subsystem.

   *  Multicomputer interconnects are closed systems, with no need for
      cryptographic security mechanisms.

   Many aspects of compilation and job execution are beyond the scope of
   this set of specifications, but some points will affect the network
   node definitions and interfaces, so it is important to present them
   here to establish a basis for design decisions:

   *  The general purpose of a multicomputer system is to execute
      application programs that exceed the capabilities of a single
      quantum node.  The subdivision of the application into smaller
      quantum programs and the assignment of those sub-programs to nodes
      in the network is beyond the scope of this specification, and may
      be either automatically done by the compiler or manually done by
      the programmer.

   *  Programs are centrally compiled and distributed to nodes.  (Note
      that, technically, this is different from classical MPI, where a
      _command_ is sent to worker nodes, but the mapping of that command
      to an executable program and versioning and distribution of
      programs are outside the scope of MPI.  It is, however, a
      convenient assumption and common practice to ensure the same
      program is executed at all worker nodes.)

   *  Execution is coordinated by a job controller: every node executes
      the same program, but with different parameters (e.g., which
      portion of the problem to work on).

   *  Applications consist of both classical computation and quantum
      computation; within a node, the classical portion of the program
      delegates certain computational tasks to the quantum processor
      (sometimes called a QPU), similar to a classical coprocessor
      (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coprocessor) such as a GPU
      (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_processing_unit).





Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 17]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   *  Classical data related to quantum operations (principally
      measurement results and event notifications that trigger further
      actions) is sent peer-to-peer, not back to the centralized
      controller, during execution.

   *  Within the runtime system, the interface between the (portion of
      the) application running at each node's classical controller is
      analogous to the interface between an application and the MPI
      messaging system or a socket (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
      Network_socket) in an ordinary Internet application.  This quantum
      socket is an active area of research and is not defined here.

   *  The creation of sequences of end-to-end entangled states, roughly
      equivalent to TCP, is the responsibility of RuleSets, inspired by
      software-defined networking (SDN) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
      Software-defined_networking).  A RuleSet can also be viewed as
      something like a Berkeley Packet Filter (BPF): it's a small
      program that handled actions that the application could do, but
      the application can't achieve the low, reliable latency to do it.

   *  In principle, all nodes are running the same program, distributed
      to all nodes.  Since the compiled application circuits are often
      parameter- or input-dependent as well, separate nodes may have
      separate instances of the application.  This may result in a small
      additional burden on the execution management system.

   *  In principle, the application and the communication system are
      separately compiled and managed.  However, in practice the RuleSet
      may be compiled as part of the application by using a library of
      network functions.  (As with classical parallel program runtime
      systems, the boundary between the application program, supplied
      libraries, and the kernel itself (if any) is implementation-
      dependent.)

   *  Compiling the network communication into the application program
      eliminates the need for separate program and RuleSet distribution
      protocols.  However, the event messages that are part of the
      architecturally defined RuleSet operation are sent and received as
      usual, such that the behavior of the node is the same regardless
      of such implementation choices.

   *  Compilation and execution may achieve application goals via
      teledata, telegate or measurement of multiqubit Pauli operators
      transparently; the network is unaware of this distinction.
      Management of application-level variables and their movement from
      node to node, if any, is the responsibility of the compiler and is
      beyond the scope of this specification.




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 18]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   *  The resources in a multicomputer may be partitioned to run
      multiple jobs [sane-jobs], but this is beyond the scope of the
      current specifications.

   The realities of quantum hardware result in a few important
   differences from classical multicomputers:

   *  Multicomputer interconnects may be either optically switched or
      composed entirely of point-to-point links.  In switched networks,
      depending on optical hardware as well as photonic qubit
      representation, reconfiguring the switch or switches may be an
      extremely high-latency operation.

   *  Application execution at end nodes proceeds in phases tied to
      specific communication patterns.  Even with a fixed sequence of
      application-level operations, the execution time of a phase can be
      variable because entanglement generation is probabilistic.  Local
      gates can also be probabilistic under some circumstances, but for
      many node hardware types, fast local gate execution means the
      impact of variable gate execution time will be small.

   *  In switched systems, reconfiguration of switches is centrally
      coordinated between phases.  Thus, while classical data moves
      directly node-to-node during autonomous phase execution, advancing
      from phase to phase must be done at the direction of the job
      controller.

   *  Because execution is centrally coordinated, the network system is
      not required to provide multiplexing.  (This is a substantial
      difference from data center networks, QLANs and QWANs.)

   *  The compiler may include multihop communication within a phase
      using hop-by-hop teleportation without reconfiguring any switches;
      this is beyond the scope of this architecture.

   *  Execution of the quantum portion of the node program generally
      involves hard real-time actions, both unconditional and
      conditioned on prior quantum measurement results.  This generally
      requires compilation of the quantum program to very low-level
      actions to be executed by FPGAs or ASICs.

   *  Systems may be partially or completely emulated, decoupling
      development of different subsystems. e.g., an EPPS plus a MEAS
      together can emulate a COMP node that emits single photons.

   *  Systems may be noisy, intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ); near-
      term, small-scale fault tolerant; or fault-tolerant, application-
      scale quantum (FASQ).



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 19]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   *  Quantum error correction is above the level of these
      specifications, but may involve distributed lattice surgery
      [ramette-remote], [leone-remote], or [sinclair-ft-interconnect].

9.2.  Data Center Network (QDCN)

   The hardware for quantum data center networks will be almost
   identical to multicomputers; the primary differences are in the
   workload, scheduling, programming model and assumptions of trust.
   Distributed control and protocols for multiplexing and connection
   setup may be necessary.

9.3.  Local-Area Network (QLAN)

   A QLAN will be deployed within a building or across a campus.  It may
   connect quantum computers (including but not necessarily
   multicomputers) and sensors.  A sensor, for example, may be connected
   to a computer with substantial memory for e.g. shadow tomography,
   learning from few measurements and related protocols.

   A QLAN will have a less regular topology than a multicomputer or
   QDCN.  Distance, latency, fidelity, and success probability will all
   vary on a per-link basis.

   Distributed control and protocols for multiplexing and connection
   setup are necessary.

9.4.  Wide-Area Network (QWAN)

   Wide-area networks may involve client-server or peer-to-peer
   communication.  One particular scenario of interest is a measurement-
   only (MEAS) client end node connecting to a centralized,
   supercomputer-scale quantum computer (perhaps, but not necessarily, a
   multicomputer) for the purposes of executing _blind quantum
   computation_ [fitzsimons-blind], [morimae-blind].

   QWAN client-server communication very likely will suffer from the
   "incast" problem of excessive traffic concentrating near certain
   nodes.  Management of this problem is beyond the scope of this
   document.

10.  Quantum Optical Building Blocks

   This section informally describes the physical building blocks and
   concepts used in the physical layer of a quantum network.






Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 20]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


10.1.  Qubits

   In this network architecture, we use only qubits, which may have two
   states identified as 0 and 1.  Quantum information systems using
   qutrits, qudits, qunats or continuous variable (c.v.) quantum states
   are beyond the scope of the current set of specifications.

   Qubits (also defined in RFC 9340) must conform to a sufficient subset
   of the DiVincenzo criteria [divincenzo-criteria].

10.2.  Photons, Wave Packets and Optical Modes

   Optical mode (link-layer view).

   An optical mode is a well-defined slot of a physical link, specified
   by path, time window, frequency, polarization, or similar parameters,
   such that the receiver can be configured to monitor that slot and
   determine whether it is occupied by at least one photon or is empty.

   The mode exists regardless of whether a photon is present; a photon
   is an excitation of the mode, not the mode itself.

   In quantum networking, link capacity and state must be described in
   terms of modes (slots), not photons; photons merely occupy modes,
   while empty modes correspond to vacuum states that are still
   physically and operationally meaningful.

   Technical note: In idealized models, distinct modes correspond to
   orthogonal field solutions, ensuring perfect distinguishability.

   Short example: A quantum optical link may define one mode per time
   window.  During each window, the receiver monitors the mode.  A
   detection event indicates that the mode was occupied by at least one
   photon; the absence of a detection indicates that the same mode was
   empty.  Both outcomes correspond to distinct physical states of the
   link.

10.3.  Photonic Qubits

   Photons are used in networks to carry qubits.  There are several
   possible on-the-wire photonic qubit representations, e.g.

   *  Polarization

   *  Time bin

   *  Which path




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 21]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   *  Energy level (wavelength)

   These representations and more about the concept of an _optical mode_
   are discussed in the Standard Photons document, and are provided here
   only for informational purposes.

10.4.  Memories

   For our purposes, we do not need to worry about the physical
   implementation of memories, only that they may hold quantum data
   (qubits) that may be under the management of the network software and
   protocols.  They may be entangled with photons or with other memory
   qubits.

   Generally, the creation or entanglement of a state in memory is
   imperfect, and the memory has a finite lifetime.

   The entanglement of a memory qubit with a photon is a technology-
   dependent process.  To create fiber-compatible and optical equipment-
   compatible photons, wavelength conversion via transduction may be
   necessary.  In 2025, transduction is a low-probability process, and
   hurts fidelity as well.

10.5.  Photon Sources

   Photons may be emitted by _sources_ of many types [nist-singles] .
   Single photons may come from attenuated lasers, or be emitted by a
   variety of quantum devices, such as quantum dots, or by individual
   atoms.

   Photons may be unentangled, entangled with other photons, or
   entangled with quantum memories.

10.5.1.  Unentangled Single Photons

   Unentangled photons exhibit quantum properties.  They can carry
   information in any of the characteristics listed above, and may be
   put into a superposition of multiple basis states for e.g. quantum
   key distribution purposes.  In this document, unentangled individual
   photons are not used.

10.5.2.  Entangled Photon Pairs

   Pairs of photons entangled with each other can be made via a variety
   of physical processes.  Devices that make such pairs can be
   components of nodes such as the Entangled Photon Pair Source (EPPS),
   described in a separate document.




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 22]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


10.5.3.  Memory-Emitted Photons

   Photons emitted by quantum memories, such as single atoms, may remain
   entangled to the memory, if the memory was in a superposition of
   basis states.

10.6.  Detectors

   Detectors may be either _single-photon detectors_, which click when
   _one or more_ photons hit the detector, or _number resolving
   detectors_, which can distinguish between one, two, or more photons
   hitting the detector within the same time window [nist-singles].  In
   this document, detectors may be assumed to be single-photon
   detectors.

11.  Requirements

   This section documents the requirements for all networks adhering to
   this architecture.

11.1.  General Requirements

11.1.1.  Functional Requirements

   *  Operates on qubits.  (Qutrits, qudits, qunats and continuous-
      variable systems are out of scope of this architecture, except
      where physical or link layers present such physical variables as
      qubits.)

   *  Is independent of physical implementation of memories, photonic
      data representations, etc.  (Multipartite states created by the
      network are not a requirement of the network.)

   *  Supports pairwise Bell pair creation between nodes with one or
      more of the B, C or T timing classes above.

   *  The architecture must support deployments ranging from
      multicomputer to wide area networks.

   *  The architecture must support multiple photonic synchronization
      domains, as either point-to-point or optically switched paths.
      The architecture must support some form of buffering between PSDs.

   *  The architecture must support entanglement swapping.  (Note that
      single PSD deployments may not need entanglement swapping.)






Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 23]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   *  The architecture must support evolution of single-photon,
      unentangled, single-purpose quantum key distribution networks to
      fully entangled, multipurpose networks.

11.1.2.  Interface Requirements

   *  Supports one or more applications, such as the ones in [RFC9583],
      with APIs consistent with the B, C, or T classes.

   *  The network must enable applications to match quantum states at
      each end of the Bell pair by name.

11.1.3.  Physical Requirements

   Physical requirements such as distance, wavelength, vibration, power,
   etc. will be case-dependent.

11.1.4.  Environmental Requirements

   Physical requirements such as distance, wavelength, vibration, power,
   etc. will be case-dependent.

11.2.  Network Management Requirements

11.2.1.  Fault Management

   *  Supports isolation of hardware and software faults.

   *  Supports monitoring and reporting of fidelity.

11.2.2.  Configuration Management

   *  The architecture must support the use of both manual and automated
      network configuration tools.

12.  Top Level Architecture

12.1.  Deterministic Classical Control of Quantum States

   This network architecture is entirely classically controlled.  Its
   task is to generate shared quantum states for applications residing
   at separate nodes.  While many quantum events are inherently
   probabilistic, and loss of photons is also inherently probabilistic,
   this architecture does not use multipartite quantum states for e.g.
   routing of two-party requests.  (An extension of this network
   architecture may support generation of multi-partite state for
   applications at a later date.)




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 24]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


13.  Communication Service

   (Substantial portions of this section are adapted from Naphan
   Benchasattabuse's Ph.D. thesis, which in turn is adapted from earlier
   papers by Van Meter et al. [van-meter-qi-arch] and others.)

   The design of a quantum network must begin with a clear definition of
   its fundamental services --- what quantum states or capabilities the
   network is expected to provide to end users.  These decisions
   determine the complexity of the protocols at the network layer and
   the applications that run above it.  A minimalist design treats _Bell
   pairs_ as the primary network-level service.  Bell pairs serve as the
   smallest unit of entanglement and the foundation for nearly all
   quantum communication protocols.  Restricting the service to Bell
   pair distribution simplifies the network's responsibilities.
   However, this approach shifts complexity to the applications, which
   must construct multipartite or fault-tolerant states themselves and
   manage the coordination overhead that entails.

   At the other end of the spectrum, networks may offer richer services
   such as multipartite entangled states [ghz], [dur-w-state],
   [hein-multiparty], [hein-graph-entanglement] or fault-tolerant state
   teleportation.  While applications can, in theory, synthesize these
   states from Bell pairs, direct network-level support may offer
   efficiency gains and reduce sensitivity to noise by internalizing
   complex procedures like direct graph state generations or supporting
   the delivery of error-correcting code encoded logical qubits.

   In our architecture, we adopt Bell pair distribution as the core
   network service, as it allows for a well-scoped, foundational
   architectural framework.

   Importantly, the semantics of Bell pair distribution are not merely
   those of passive delivery.  Even in this basic model, distributed
   quantum computation occurs along the path via entanglement swapping,
   possibly combined with purification at intermediate repeater nodes.
   A proper service definition must account for this processing, as it
   directly affects fidelity, latency, and trust assumptions in the
   network.

   In addition to quantum state delivery, timing information is often a
   critical part of the service.  Applications in distributed quantum
   sensing and clock synchronization [degen-sensing],
   [proctor-quantum-sensing], [proctor-multiparm], [giovannetti-metro],
   [gottesman-telescope], [ilo-okeke-clock] require precise knowledge of
   when entanglement was established or when measurement events
   occurred.  Hence, high-precision timestamps may need to be bundled
   into the service interface offered by the network.



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 25]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


14.  Architectural Planes

   All nodes in the network will have one or more of the following
   classes of interfaces, also referred to as _planes_.

   *  *Quantum:* The quantum signals and in-channel, hardware-dependent,
      real-time classical signals for timing and synchronization of
      photon wave packets.  A node with a quantum plane incorporates one
      or more quantum devices.  The quantum devices may be local or
      remote.

   *  *Data:* Classical data plane for exchange of messages about in-
      progress quantum communication sessions.  Generally, the data
      plane consists of _event notifications_ and _measurement results_
      related to RuleSet-driven connections or testing sessions.  A data
      plane must be accompanied by a control plane.

   *  *Control:* Classical control plane for establishing and managing
      connections and testing sessions.  Routing and multiplexing
      messages are included in the control plane.

   *  *Management:* Network management for configuring the devices and
      monitoring operation.  Managing services provided by nodes,
      security, addressing, etc., and monitoring health of links,
      collecting statistics on traffic through the node, any alerts such
      as security, etc.

14.1.  Quantum

   The quantum signals and in-channel, hardware-dependent, real-time
   classical signals for timing and synchronization of photon wave
   packets.  A node with a quantum plane incorporates one or more
   quantum devices.  The quantum devices may be local or remote.

   The quantum plane functionality executes the functions described as
   "Interferometric Stabilization" and "Wave Packet Overlap" and subject
   to the constraints in "Detector Timing Windows" in the Timing Regimes
   document.

14.2.  Data

   When operating in qubit mode, the Data Plane consists of classical
   messages that convey events for RuleSet operation and the
   communication ports and software that generate and consume such
   messages.

   When operating in device mode, the Data Plane consists of RPCs for
   controlling individual devices.



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 26]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   Data plane functions may share data with management plane functions
   as part of the link management process, e.g. using disti-mation.  If
   this is done, security and privacy concerns must be addressed.

   The control plane functionality executes the functions described as
   "Pre-configured Event-driven Tasks" in the Timing Regimes document.

14.3.  Control

   The classical control plane is responsible for establishing and
   managing connections and testing sessions.  Routing and multiplexing
   messages are included in the control plane.

   Control plane functions may share data with management plane
   functions, e.g. sharing parameter adjustment values and timings.  If
   this is done, security and privacy concerns must be addressed.

   The control plane functionality executes the functions described as
   "Measurement basis selection", "Optical switch control" and some
   tasks in "Host-side Application-level Tasks" in the Timing Regimes
   document.

14.4.  Management

   While connection-specific changes to configuration, such as switching
   and necessary, immediate changes to e.g. polarization and optical
   delay may appear as control plane functions, slow-rate monitoring and
   adjustment of parameters such as timing or polarization due to drift
   in temperature, voltage or other parameters is the responsibility of
   the management plane.  The management plane may receive useful data
   on the health and fidelity of links as a result of data plane and
   control plane operations.

   The management plane functionality executes the functions described
   as "Background Tasks" in the Timing Regimes document.

15.  Protocol Layers

   This document describes a network architecture.  Network designs are
   often described in terms of a layered protocol stack such as the
   7-layer OSI model (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model), although
   the Internet can be more accurately described as a three-, four-, or
   five-layer model (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
   Internet_protocol_suite#Layering_evolution_and_representations_in_the_literature),
   depending in part on whether a distinction is made between the
   physical and link layers and in part on how the application layer is
   subdivided.




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 27]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   In a layered network architecture, each layer processes a prepended
   header to complete its task.  As messages move down the stack (from
   application toward actual transmission), they may be subdivided into
   smaller units, and additional layer-specific headers are prepended.
   On receipt, headers are removed as the message moves up the stack,
   and boundaries between messages may be altered.

   A complete network architecture consists of much more than the layers
   processing individual packets; many of the critical supporting
   protocols around naming, routing, security, network management, etc.
   utilize messages carried using the same protocol stack designed for
   application data.

   In a quantum network, this layering is less clear.

   (More to be added here.)

16.  Nodes and Node Types

   (Substantial portions of this section are adapted from Naphan
   Benchasattabuse's Ph.D. thesis, which in turn is adapted from earlier
   papers by Van Meter et al. and others.)

   The architecture of a quantum network is defined by its constituent
   nodes and their specialized functions.  For clarity in describing our
   system, we group these nodes according to their primary contributions
   to network operation.  In our architecture, we classify nodes into
   three main types: end nodes, for application interaction; repeater
   and router nodes, for extending entanglement and path management; and
   support nodes, for auxiliary operational tasks.

   The qNode specification provides additional details on the common
   roles and responsibilities of all quantum network nodes, and serves
   as the equivalent of the Internet hosts requirements RFCs [RFC1122],
   [RFC1123].  Each node type is further defined in a detailed
   specification in a separate document.

16.1.  End Nodes

   End nodes represent hosts that wish to execute a quantum application
   such as quantum key distribution, secret sharing and blind quantum
   computation [broadbent-bfk-protocol], [fitzsimons-blind].  The
   technological maturity required of an end node heavily depends on the
   desired application.  There are four major kinds of end nodes:

   *A measurement (MEAS) node* is the most basic type of quantum end
   node, designed primarily for protocols that do not require quantum
   state storage.  Its core capability is to receive individual photons



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 28]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   and perform measurements on them in at least two different bases.
   Lacking quantum memory, MEAS nodes are well-suited for applications
   like quantum key distribution (QKD) or as simple terminals in certain
   forms of secure delegated computation protocols
   [morimae-blind],[fitzsimons-blind], typically interacting with the
   network in a synchronous manner where measurement results directly
   yield classical data.

   *A sensor (SNSR) node* is a specialized end node designed to utilize
   entangled states, often shared with distant parties, for high-
   precision measurements of physical quantities, for clock
   synchronization tasks, or for distributed sensing tasks [ge-linear],
   [proctor-quantum-sensing], [degen-sensing], [giovannetti-metro],
   [proctor-multiparm].  These nodes typically feature limited quantum
   memory to hold working qubits (e.g., one half of an entangled pair)
   and possess specific quantum processing capabilities tailored for
   sensing protocols.  Such capabilities include performing joint
   measurements, like Bell State Measurements (BSMs), between their
   stored qubits and photons that have interacted with the environment
   [huang-imaging-stars], [gottesman-telescope].  While an SNSR node's
   internal processing is specialized, certain sensing applications may
   also necessitate high-rate entanglement generation from the network
   to achieve desired performance.  For SNSR nodes, precise timing
   information is almost invariably a critical component of the service
   they provide or require, and their operation typically culminates in
   outputting classical data that corresponds to the sensed phenomenon.

   *A store (STOR) node* is a specialized end node whose primary
   function is to serve as a high-fidelity quantum data repository.  Its
   core capabilities are the long-term storage of quantum states---often
   prepared and teleported from other locations---and the ability to
   teleport these states out on demand.  While a STOR node does not
   require a universal gate set, it must support certain gates (e.g.,
   Clifford gates) for active quantum error correction to preserve the
   stored quantum data.  This includes using quantum error-correcting
   codes to protect against decoherence, along with mitigation
   strategies for correlated errors from events such as cosmic ray
   strikes [martinis-correlated], [sane-phonons], [xu-dist-qec],
   [vepsaelaeinen-ionizing], [wu-mitigating], [li-cosmic].  In a network
   context, STOR nodes may function as data servers, enabling
   asynchronous applications where valuable states are prepared and
   stored for later retrieval.

   *A computational (COMP) node* represents a full-fledged quantum
   processing endpoint within the network.  Equipped with quantum memory
   and additional algorithmic qubits, it can store, manipulate, and
   perform complex computations on quantum states received from the
   network or generated locally.  COMP nodes support a wide range of



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 29]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   advanced quantum network applications, including distributed quantum
   algorithms, more general forms of blind quantum computation, and
   potentially fault-tolerant quantum computing, often requiring
   asynchronous interfaces to coordinate their local quantum workloads
   with network operations [ambainis-multiparty-coin], [taherkhani-byz],
   [mayers-unconditional], [christandl-anon], [broadbent-bfk-protocol],
   [fitzsimons-blind], [mahadev-homomorphic], [dulek-homomorphic],
   [shapourian-qdc-infra], [sutcliffe-dist-qec], [yoder-tour-de-gross].
   [kim-ft-million].

16.2.  Support Nodes

   *An entangled photon pair source (EPPS)* is a device dedicated to
   generating pairs of entangled photons, commonly through processes
   like Spontaneous Parametric Down-Conversion (SPDC).  These entangled
   photons are then typically distributed over quantum channels to be
   captured or measured at link endpoints, forming the initial resource
   for entanglement-based protocols.  EPPS nodes can be deployed in
   various scenarios, including terrestrial fiber links or free-space
   satellite-to-ground communication [fittipaldi-sat],
   [haldar-sat-dist], [khatri-spooky], [yin-1200km].

   *A Bell state analyzer (BSA)* is a crucial component for performing
   projective measurements on two incoming photons, ideally projecting
   their combined state into one of the four Bell states.  BSAs are
   fundamental for realizing photonic entanglement
   swapping[zukowski-entanglement-swapping], a primary process that
   creates link-level entanglement, used particularly to convert memory-
   photon entanglement into memory-memory entanglement between distant
   quantum memories.  The efficiency and complexity of a BSA depend on
   the optical implementation and the specific photonic qubit encoding
   used.

   *A Repeater Graph State Source (RGSS)* is a specialized source that
   generates multipartite entangled photonic states, specifically
   tailored for all-photonic (memory-less) quantum repeater
   architectures [azuma-rgs],
   [hilaire-rgs-optimizing-gen-time],[buterakos-graph-generation],
   [hilaire-logical-bsm].  An RGSS typically distributes segments of the
   generated repeater graph state to adjacent network nodes, where
   subsequent measurements on these photonic qubits are performed to
   establish long-distance entanglement without relying on quantum
   memories.

   *An advanced Bell state analyzer (ABSA)* represents a more
   sophisticated version of a BSA, particularly required in advanced
   all-photonic repeater protocols based on repeater graph
   states[azuma-rgs],



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 30]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   [hilaire-rgs-optimizing-gen-time],[buterakos-graph-generation],
   [hilaire-logical-bsm].  Unlike basic BSAs, an ABSA must be capable of
   performing measurements on single or multiple photons in dynamically
   selectable bases.  The choice of measurement basis often depends on
   the outcomes of prior measurements within the network and the
   specific structure of the repeater graph state being utilized,
   implying more complex hardware and real-time classical control logic.

   *An optical switch (OSW)* is a device that can passively route
   photons from input optical fibers or paths to different output paths
   without performing measurements on them [koyama-24].  OSWs, which can
   be based on technologies like nanomechanical systems or nanophotonic
   circuits, can be integrated as components within other node types
   (e.g., routers or complex end nodes) or can function as standalone
   elements in the network to dynamically reconfigure optical pathways.

16.3.  Repeater Nodes

   *A first-generation repeater (REP1)* is a network node with two
   quantum interfaces, whose main task is to extend entanglement.  Its
   primary operations include generating link-level Bell pairs with its
   neighbors, performing entanglement swapping to connect these
   segments, and managing errors through heralded entanglement
   purification on physical qubits along the connection path.

   *A second-generation repeater (REP2)* also focuses on entanglement
   swapping to bridge distances but generally requires a larger quantum
   memory capacity and higher fidelity local quantum operations than a
   REP1.  It utilizes quantum error correction (QEC) to manage
   operational errors in conjunction with heralded link-level
   entanglement generation.  Instead of, or in addition to, purifying
   link-level physical Bell pairs, a REP2 node operates on logical
   qubits, where quantum information is encoded across multiple physical
   qubits to protect it from errors.  This approach inherently demands
   more sophisticated hardware and advanced computational capabilities
   for encoding, decoding, and error correction routines during
   swapping.

   *A quantum router (RTR)* is a more complex and versatile node,
   possessing all capabilities of a quantum repeater and typically
   featuring three or more quantum network interfaces, enabling it to
   make sophisticated path selection decisions in complex topologies.
   Architecturally, an RTR may consist of multiple line cards and a
   quantum backplane, allowing it to run a full suite of network
   operation protocols.  Beyond basic repeating functions like
   entanglement swapping, an RTR can govern network borders potentially
   interfacing between different repeater generations or technologies,
   participate in generating multipartite entangled states if the



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 31]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   network provides such a service [meignant-dgs]
   [bugalho-dist-multipartite] [fischer-dgs] [fan-dgs-dist], and may act
   as a Responder in connection setups by rewriting or generating new
   RuleSets for different network domains.

16.4.  Composite Nodes

   A node may also aggregate the functions of more than one node, in a
   form known as a _composite node_ or _composite logical node_. A
   common form of composite node is a switching BSA.  When multiple
   devices of the same type are controlled by a single controller, they
   may be presented either as a node with multiple devices or as a
   composite node where each device is in turn represented as a node.
   Presenting as a single node is preferred.

17.  Links

17.1.  The Link Service

   A link provides Bell pairs across a single PSD.  Each Bell pair is
   named via an identifier.  This service may be either real time or
   batched.

17.2.  Photonic Path Description

   The optical path over which photons flow from source to detector in
   the process of creating a Bell pair can be described using
   terminology that names the node types in the path; the direction of
   flow of photons can be inferred.  This path description can be
   applied to point-to-point or switched links within a single PSD.

   Device type single-letter abbreviations and their corresponding node
   type:

   *  M: memory (COMP or STOR)

   *  S: source (of entangled photons) (EPPS)

   *  I: interference (i.e., Bell state measurement) (BSA)

   *  D: detector (i.e. a measurement node) (MEAS)

   *  X: switch (OSW)

   Examples of path descriptions that may commonly appear:

   *  DSD: detector-source-detector




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 32]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   *  MIM: memory-interference-memory

   *  MSM: memory-source-memory

   *  MM: memory-memory

   *  DSISD: detector-source-inteference-source-detector

   At any point in a path except the ends, a photon may pass through one
   or more switches.

   In a switched architecture, for example, photons may pass through
   paths such as:

   *  DXSXD

   *  MXIXM

   *  MXXIXM

   (Question: Does this notation also need to represent frequency
   conversion?)

17.3.  Point-to-point

   Point-to-point links may be either fiber-based or free space.  A link
   encompassing the path of one or more photons may be partially fiber
   and partially free space.

17.4.  Switched

   A system built around a pool of detectors, particularly organized as
   BSAs, utilizing switched MIM links can also be characterized as a
   _detector-centric architecture_.

   For pseudocode for switching (routing) certain types of devices, see
   Koyama et al. [koyama-24].

17.5.  Multidrop or Bus

   A multidrop link, or a bus, is a shared physical channel to which
   more than two stations may be attached.









Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 33]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


18.  Connections

   No task involving quantum communication ever involves a single qubit
   or single entangled state.  The connection provides the framework for
   managing the creation of an order set of entangled states to be
   consumed by applications.  A connection is _stateful_ at the end
   nodes.  Nodes involved in the creation of end-to-end entanglement for
   those end nodes will be _connection aware_, meaning that they can
   identify resources and messages and carry out communication tasks
   necessary for a specific connection, but may not have substantial
   amounts of state that is dynamically updated on a per-action basis;
   any actions for nodes in this class must be idempotent or known to
   occur only once.  Some or all nodes may be _fully stateful_, tracking
   the disposition of specific, named quantum states.

   Connections may be created using either a fully-distributed protocol
   [I-D.draft-van-meter-qirg-quantum-connection-setup] or a centralized
   mechanism.  In either case, qNodes involved in the connection receive
   RuleSets that are created by a single controller to coordinate local
   operations to build the end-to-end entangled states requested by an
   application.

   Connections are unaware of the shared use of resources and of other
   connections.  Multiplexing is the responsibility of a separate
   subsystem, though connection setup should be done with awareness of
   the availability of unavailability of resources at involved nodes.

19.  Resource Management: Multiplexing and Routing

   Both link usage time slots and memory can be shared among multiple
   connections and therefore must be actively managed via a multiplexing
   system.  This task is particularly challenging in switched networks.

20.  Classical Communication

   A quantum network depends on classical communication; indeed, almost
   all of the behavior is governed by, initiated by, or managed and
   reported via classical messages and signals.  These messages and
   signals have several key roles, described in the following
   subsections.  See the Timing Regimes document
   [I-D.draft-hajdusek-qirg-timing-physics] for an outline of the
   physics driving these requirements.

20.1.  Quantum Plane

   Yes, the quantum plane includes some classical signals.





Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 34]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


20.2.  Control Plane

   *  Qubit mode connections and communication

      -  connection-level control of switching of photons

      -  real-time event notification for RuleSets

   *  Device mode control

20.3.  Data Plane

   *  Qubit mode connections and communication

      -  connection-level control of switching of photons

      -  real-time event notification for RuleSets

   *  Device mode control

20.4.  Management plane: Node and link management

   *  reporting of parameters fixed by device physics

   *  reporting and setting of parameters selectable by node
      configuration

   *  reporting and adjustment of slowly-changing parameters (such as
      polarization drift)

   *  typical network node management tasks such as software updates

20.5.  Mechanisms

   *  RPC for some tasks

      -  especially device-mode control

      -  qRPC wrapper for classical RPC mechanisms

   *  message broker or event broker for other tasks

      -  especially qubit-mode RuleSet notifications

21.  Naming and Addressing






Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 35]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


21.1.  State naming and management in RuleSets

   (Incorporates naming material from Naphan's thesis.  Probably needs
   updating to account for testbed realities.)

   Managing and agreeing upon the specific qubits for joint operations
   like entanglement purification or swapping among collaborating nodes
   are critical responsibilities handled by RuleSets.  While it is
   possible to draw inspiration from the IP architecture by employing
   network-wide unique naming for qubits, RuleSets have local execution
   contexts, making global naming for individual qubits unnecessary.

   Instead, RuleSets use local logical names for qubits.  At the lowest
   level, physical qubits within a QNIC can be addressed by the local
   node using a tuple like <QNICAddress,QubitIndex>.  However, this
   level of detail is not, and should not be, visible to the RuleSet
   logic.

   Within a RuleSet instance on a given node, the RuleSet mechanism
   identifies a quantum resource primarily by its *tag* --- a label that
   categorizes the resource into a specific pool corresponding to its
   current role or stage in the protocol.  To ensure an unambiguous and
   absolute ordering of multiple resources that may share the same tag
   (e.g., several Bell pairs awaiting purification), each resource, upon
   being allocated to a tag, is automatically assigned a \emph{sequence
   number} by the local RuleSet engine.  The combination <tag,seq no.>
   thus serves as a distinct and locally unique key within that RuleSet
   instance for referencing a resource and associating it with relevant
   metadata, such as its tracked fidelity.  Actions specified within
   Rules typically reference these resources based on their tag and
   their relative order within that tag, for instance, by operating on
   the resource with the smallest sequence number (i.e., the oldest
   available in that pool).  This structured internal naming is vital
   for deterministic local operations and for preventing local
   operational mismatches that could lead to problems like the
   leapfrogging issue if not handled carefully at a higher protocol
   design level.

   The RuleSet execution mechanism itself, therefore, only requires and
   manages this local <tag,seq no.> system for resource identification
   within a single node's RuleSet instance; it does not impose any
   inherent restrictions or requirements on how shared entangled states
   are identified between nodes.  It is recommended that a strategy be
   used wherein the RuleSet creator (e.g., the Responder during
   connection setup) devises RuleSets such that the <tag,seq no.> is
   kept consistent across the RuleSets of all nodes involved in a
   particular joint operation on that resource.  The responsibility thus
   lies with the RuleSet author to ensure that RuleSets are designed---



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 36]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   potentially using this consistent naming strategy---to correctly
   manage shared resources and achieve the desired end-to-end protocol
   behavior.  This minimal local naming scheme provided by the RuleSet
   engine, combined with judicious design of the RuleSets themselves, is
   sufficient for implementing a wide range of complex quantum network
   protocols while allowing creativity with minimal restrictions on
   RuleSet creator parts.

22.  Example Networks

   While a full taxonomy of networks is neither desirable nor possible
   here, we present a few network examples using point-to-point links or
   switched architectures.  In this section, the topology is briefly
   described, followed by analysis of the path characteristics of the
   shortest path and network diameter.

22.1.  Fully Connected

   A number of the early quantum multicomputer proposals assumed a
   single, large optical switch.

   Shortest paths:

22.2.  Q-Fly Multicomputer

   An _indirect_ interconnect.  A multi-group, BSA-centric architecture.
   All nodes are part of the same PSD.  The Q-Fly architecture is
   described in Sakuma et al. [sakuma-q-fly].

   For DPFD topologies:

   *  Shortest paths

      -  intra-group: MIXM

      -  inter-group (network diameter): MXXIM

   *  Longer paths:

      -  non-shortest path: MXXIXM or longer

   For DPHD topologies:

   *  Shortest paths

      -  intra-group: MXIXM

      -  inter-group (network diameter): MXXIXM



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 37]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   *  Longer paths:

      -  non-shortest path: MXXXIXM or longer

   For SPHD topologies:

   *  Shortest paths

      -  intra-group: MXIXM

      -  inter-group (network diameter): MXXIXM

   *  Longer paths:

      -  non-shortest path: MXXXIXM or longer

22.3.  Optically Switched Fat Tree

   An _indirect_ interconnect.  Several parameters are needed to
   describe the full topology of a fat tree, which can also be called a
   _k_-ary _n_-tree:

   *  _k_ is the switch radix

   *  _n_ is the tree depth

   This simplest description assumes homogeneous hardware, where all
   switches have the same number of ports and all links are the same
   bandwidth.  Leiserson's original fat tree proposed single links of
   increasing bandwidth at higher levels of the tree, giving the network
   its name; this approach provides no redundancy or path diversity, and
   achieving higher transfer rates is impractical in some technologies,
   including quantum.  Consequently, most fat tree deployments use
   multiple links to several switches at higher levels of the tree, in a
   configuration that is also know as a _folded Clos_ network.

22.4.  Repeater Fat Tree

   The repeater fat tree is described in [choi-fat-tree].

22.5.  2-D Grid Multicomputer

   A _direct_ interconnect.  A 2-D grid of nodes, where nodes with
   memory and certain computational capabilities (canonically COMP
   nodes) have up to four interfaces connecting to neighboring nodes.
   Each node must act as a memory buffer and repeater to enable
   communication between non-neighboring nodes.




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 38]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


22.6.  Ring

   A _direct_ interconnect.  All nodes in a ring have exactly two
   neighbors.  Each node must act as a memory buffer and repeater to
   enable communication between non-neighboring nodes.

   A ring is described in (something from Simon's group).

22.7.  QLAN

   A quantum local area network will have:

   *  irregular topology, possibly of heterogeneous link types

   *  distributed multiplexing

   *  distributed routing

23.  APIs for Network Service ("Quantum Sockets")

   The API used by classical software to interface with the quantum
   depends on which class of timing dependency pattern (B, C, or T) is
   to be supported.

24.  Security Considerations

   Quantum multicomputer systems are assumed to be constructed as
   isolated, centrally controlled systems with no need for
   confidentiality, integrity, and availability (the "CIA triad")
   assurance via cryptographic methods.

   Security considerations for other network types are an open topic of
   study and as such are not yet ready for specification and
   standardization.

25.  References

25.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 39]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


25.2.  Informative References

   [aboy-governance]
              Aboy, M., Gasser, U., Cohen, I., and M. Kop, "Quantum
              technology governance: A standards-first approach",
              American Association for the Advancement of Science
              (AAAS), Science vol. 389, no. 6760, pp. 575-578,
              DOI 10.1126/science.adw0018, August 2025,
              <https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adw0018>.

   [ambainis-multiparty-coin]
              Ambainis, A., Buhrman, H., Dodis, Y., and H. Rohrig,
              "Multiparty quantum coin flipping", IEEE, Proceedings.
              19th IEEE Annual Conference on Computational Complexity,
              2004. pp. 250-259, DOI 10.1109/ccc.2004.1313848, November
              2004, <https://doi.org/10.1109/ccc.2004.1313848>.

   [awschalom-roadmap]
              , Awschalom, D., Bernien, H., Brown, R., Clerk, A.,
              Chitambar, E., Dibos, A., Dionne, J., Eriksson, M.,
              Fefferman, B., Fuchs, G., Gambetta, J., Goldschmidt, E.,
              Guha, S., Heremans, F., Irwin, K., Jayich, A., Jiang, L.,
              Karsch, J., Kasevich, M., Kolkowitz, S., Kwiat, P., Ladd,
              T., Lowell, J., Maslov, D., Mason, N., Matsuura, A.,
              McDermott, R., van Meter, R., Miller, A., Orcutt, J.,
              Saffman, M., Schleier-Smith, M., Singh, M., Smith, P.,
              Suchara, M., Toudeh-Fallah, F., Turlington, M., Woods, B.,
              and T. Zhong, "A Roadmap for Quantum Interconnects",
              Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI),
              DOI 10.2172/1900586, July 2022,
              <https://doi.org/10.2172/1900586>.

   [azuma-rgs]
              Azuma, K., Tamaki, K., and H. Lo, "All-photonic quantum
              repeaters", Springer Science and Business Media LLC,
              Nature Communications vol. 6, no. 1,
              DOI 10.1038/ncomms7787, April 2015,
              <https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms7787>.

   [bennett-mixed]
              Bennett, C., DiVincenzo, D., Smolin, J., and W. Wootters,
              "Mixed-state entanglement and quantum error correction",
              American Physical Society (APS), Physical Review A vol.
              54, no. 5, pp. 3824-3851, DOI 10.1103/physreva.54.3824,
              November 1996, <https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.54.3824>.






Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 40]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   [broadbent-bfk-protocol]
              Broadbent, A., Fitzsimons, J., and E. Kashefi, "Universal
              Blind Quantum Computation", IEEE, 2009 50th Annual IEEE
              Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science pp. 517-526,
              DOI 10.1109/focs.2009.36, October 2009,
              <https://doi.org/10.1109/focs.2009.36>.

   [bugalho-dist-multipartite]
              Bugalho, L., Coutinho, B., Monteiro, F., and Y. Omar,
              "Distributing Multipartite Entanglement over Noisy Quantum
              Networks", Verein zur Forderung des Open Access
              Publizierens in den Quantenwissenschaften, Quantum vol. 7,
              pp. 920, DOI 10.22331/q-2023-02-09-920, February 2023,
              <https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2023-02-09-920>.

   [buterakos-graph-generation]
              Buterakos, D., Barnes, E., and S. Economou, "Deterministic
              Generation of All-Photonic Quantum Repeaters from Solid-
              State Emitters", American Physical Society (APS), Physical
              Review X vol. 7, no. 4, DOI 10.1103/physrevx.7.041023,
              October 2017, <https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevx.7.041023>.

   [choi-fat-tree]
              Choi, H., Davis, M., Iñesta, Á., and D. Englund, "Scalable
              Quantum Networks: Congestion-Free Hierarchical
              Entanglement Routing with Error Correction", arXiv,
              DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.2306.09216, 2023,
              <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2306.09216>.

   [christandl-anon]
              Christandl, M. and S. Wehner, "Quantum Anonymous
              Transmissions", Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Lecture Notes
              in Computer Science pp. 217-235, DOI 10.1007/11593447_12,
              ISBN ["9783540306849", "9783540322672"], 2005,
              <https://doi.org/10.1007/11593447_12>.

   [dally-towles]
              Dally, W. J. and B. P. Towles, "Principles and Practices
              of Interconnection Networks", ISBN 978-0-08-049780-8,
              2004.

   [degen-sensing]
              Degen, C., Reinhard, F., and P. Cappellaro, "Quantum
              sensing", American Physical Society (APS), Reviews of
              Modern Physics vol. 89, no. 3,
              DOI 10.1103/revmodphys.89.035002, July 2017,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/revmodphys.89.035002>.




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 41]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   [divincenzo-criteria]
              DiVincenzo, D. and , "The Physical Implementation of
              Quantum Computation", arXiv,  arXiv, DOI 
              10.48550/ARXIV.QUANT-PH/0002077, 2000,
              <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.QUANT-PH/0002077>.

   [drost]    Drost, R., Moore, T., and M. Brodsky, "Switching Networks
              for Pairwise-Entanglement Distribution", Optica Publishing
              Group, Journal of Optical Communications and
              Networking vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 331,
              DOI 10.1364/jocn.8.000331, April 2016,
              <https://doi.org/10.1364/jocn.8.000331>.

   [dulek-homomorphic]
              Dulek, Y., Schaffner, C., and F. Speelman, "", Theory of
              Computing Exchange, Theory of Computing vol. 14, no. 1,
              pp. 1-45, DOI 10.4086/toc.2018.v014a007, 2018,
              <https://doi.org/10.4086/toc.2018.v014a007>.

   [dur-w-state]
              Dür, W., Vidal, G., and J. Cirac, "Three qubits can be
              entangled in two inequivalent ways", American Physical
              Society (APS), Physical Review A vol. 62, no. 6,
              DOI 10.1103/physreva.62.062314, November 2000,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.62.062314>.

   [fan-dgs-dist]
              Fan, X., Zhan, C., Gupta, H., and C. Ramakrishnan,
              "Optimized Distribution of Entanglement Graph States in
              Quantum Networks", Institute of Electrical and Electronics
              Engineers (IEEE), IEEE Transactions on Quantum
              Engineering vol. 6, pp. 1-17,
              DOI 10.1109/tqe.2025.3552006, 2025,
              <https://doi.org/10.1109/tqe.2025.3552006>.

   [fischer-dgs]
              Fischer, A. and D. Towsley, "Distributing Graph States
              Across Quantum Networks", IEEE, 2021 IEEE International
              Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) pp.
              324-333, DOI 10.1109/qce52317.2021.00049, October 2021,
              <https://doi.org/10.1109/qce52317.2021.00049>.










Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 42]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   [fittipaldi-sat]
              Fittipaldi, P., Teramoto, K., Benchasattabuse, N.,
              Hajdušek, M., Van Meter, R., and F. Grosshans,
              "Entanglement Swapping in Orbit: a Satellite Quantum Link
              Case Study", IEEE, 2024 IEEE International Conference on
              Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) pp. 1924-1930,
              DOI 10.1109/qce60285.2024.00222, September 2024,
              <https://doi.org/10.1109/qce60285.2024.00222>.

   [fitzsimons-blind]
              Fitzsimons, J., "Private quantum computation: an
              introduction to blind quantum computing and related
              protocols", Springer Science and Business Media LLC, npj
              Quantum Information vol. 3, no. 1,
              DOI 10.1038/s41534-017-0025-3, June 2017,
              <https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-017-0025-3>.

   [ge-linear]
              Ge, W., Jacobs, K., Eldredge, Z., Gorshkov, A., and M.
              Foss-Feig, "Distributed Quantum Metrology with Linear
              Networks and Separable Inputs", American Physical Society
              (APS), Physical Review Letters vol. 121, no. 4,
              DOI 10.1103/physrevlett.121.043604, July 2018,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.121.043604>.

   [ghz]      Greenberger, D., Horne, M., and A. Zeilinger, "Going
              Beyond Bell's Theorem", arXiv,  arXiv,
              DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.0712.0921, 2007,
              <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.0712.0921>.

   [giovannetti-metro]
              Giovannetti, V., Lloyd, S., and L. Maccone, "Advances in
              quantum metrology", Springer Science and Business Media
              LLC, Nature Photonics vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 222-229,
              DOI 10.1038/nphoton.2011.35, March 2011,
              <https://doi.org/10.1038/nphoton.2011.35>.

   [gottesman-telescope]
              Gottesman, D., Jennewein, T., and S. Croke, "Longer-
              Baseline Telescopes Using Quantum Repeaters", American
              Physical Society (APS), Physical Review Letters vol. 109,
              no. 7, DOI 10.1103/physrevlett.109.070503, August 2012,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.109.070503>.

   [hajdusek-qcomm]
              Hajdušek, M. and R. Van Meter, "Quantum Communications",
              arXiv, DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.2311.02367, 2023,
              <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2311.02367>.



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 43]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   [haldar-sat-dist]
              Haldar, S., Agullo, I., Brady, A., Lamas-Linares, A.,
              Proctor, W., and J. Troupe, "Towards global time
              distribution via satellite-based sources of entangled
              photons", American Physical Society (APS), Physical Review
              A vol. 107, no. 2, DOI 10.1103/physreva.107.022615,
              February 2023,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.107.022615>.

   [hein-graph-entanglement]
              , , , , , and , "Entanglement in graph states and its
              applications", IOS Press, Proceedings of the International
              School of Physics “Enrico Fermi” vol. 162, pp. 115–218,
              DOI 10.3254/978-1-61499-018-5-115, 2006,
              <https://doi.org/10.3254/978-1-61499-018-5-115>.

   [hein-multiparty]
              Hein, M., Eisert, J., and H. Briegel, "Multiparty
              entanglement in graph states", American Physical Society
              (APS), Physical Review A vol. 69, no. 6,
              DOI 10.1103/physreva.69.062311, June 2004,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.69.062311>.

   [hilaire-logical-bsm]
              Hilaire, P., Barnes, E., Economou, S., and F. Grosshans,
              "Error-correcting entanglement swapping using a practical
              logical photon encoding", American Physical Society (APS),
              Physical Review A vol. 104, no. 5,
              DOI 10.1103/physreva.104.052623, November 2021,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.104.052623>.

   [hilaire-rgs-optimizing-gen-time]
              Hilaire, P., Barnes, E., and S. Economou, "Resource
              requirements for efficient quantum communication using
              all-photonic graph states generated from a few matter
              qubits", Verein zur Forderung des Open Access Publizierens
              in den Quantenwissenschaften, Quantum vol. 5, pp. 397,
              DOI 10.22331/q-2021-02-15-397, February 2021,
              <https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2021-02-15-397>.

   [horsman-lattice-surgery]
              Horsman, D., Fowler, A., Devitt, S., and R. Meter,
              "Surface code quantum computing by lattice surgery", IOP
              Publishing, New Journal of Physics vol. 14, no. 12, pp.
              123011, DOI 10.1088/1367-2630/14/12/123011, December 2012,
              <https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/14/12/123011>.





Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 44]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   [huang-imaging-stars]
              Huang, Z., Brennen, G., and Y. Ouyang, "Imaging Stars with
              Quantum Error Correction", American Physical Society
              (APS), Physical Review Letters vol. 129, no. 21,
              DOI 10.1103/physrevlett.129.210502, November 2022,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.129.210502>.

   [I-D.draft-hajdusek-qirg-timing-physics]
              Hajdusek, M. and R. Van Meter, "Timing Regimes in Quantum
              Networks and their Physical Underpinnings", Work in
              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-hajdusek-qirg-timing-
              physics-00, 2 March 2026,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-hajdusek-
              qirg-timing-physics-00>.

   [I-D.draft-van-meter-qirg-quantum-connection-setup]
              Van Meter, R. and T. Matsuo, "Connection Setup in a
              Quantum Network", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
              van-meter-qirg-quantum-connection-setup-01, 11 September
              2019, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-van-
              meter-qirg-quantum-connection-setup-01>.

   [ilo-okeke-clock]
              Ilo-Okeke, E., Tessler, L., Dowling, J., and T. Byrnes,
              "Remote quantum clock synchronization without synchronized
              clocks", Springer Science and Business Media LLC, npj
              Quantum Information vol. 4, no. 1,
              DOI 10.1038/s41534-018-0090-2, August 2018,
              <https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-018-0090-2>.

   [khatri-spooky]
              Khatri, S., Brady, A., Desporte, R., Bart, M., and J.
              Dowling, "Spooky action at a global distance: analysis of
              space-based entanglement distribution for the quantum
              internet", Springer Science and Business Media LLC, npj
              Quantum Information vol. 7, no. 1,
              DOI 10.1038/s41534-020-00327-5, January 2021,
              <https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-020-00327-5>.

   [kim-ft-million]
              Kim, J., Min, D., Cho, J., Jeong, H., Byun, I., Choi, J.,
              Hong, J., and J. Kim, "A Fault-Tolerant Million Qubit-
              Scale Distributed Quantum Computer", ACM, Proceedings of
              the 29th ACM International Conference on Architectural
              Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems,
              Volume 2 pp. 1-19, DOI 10.1145/3620665.3640388, April
              2024, <https://doi.org/10.1145/3620665.3640388>.




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 45]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   [koyama-24]
              Koyama, M., Yun, C., Taherkhani, A., Benchasattabuse, N.,
              Sane, B., Hajdušek, M., Nagayama, S., and R. Meter,
              "Optimal Switching Networks for Paired-Egress Bell State
              Analyzer Pools", IEEE, 2024 IEEE International Conference
              on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) pp. 1897-1907,
              DOI 10.1109/qce60285.2024.00219, September 2024,
              <https://doi.org/10.1109/qce60285.2024.00219>.

   [leone-remote]
              Leone, H., Le, T., Srikara, S., and S. Devitt, "Resource
              overheads and attainable rates for trapped-ion lattice
              surgery", arXiv, DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.2406.18764, 2024,
              <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2406.18764>.

   [li-cosmic]
              Li, X., Wang, J., Jiang, Y., Xue, G., Cai, X., Zhou, J.,
              Gong, M., Liu, Z., Zheng, S., Ma, D., Chen, M., Sun, W.,
              Yang, S., Yan, F., Jin, Y., Zhao, S., Ding, X., and H. Yu,
              "Cosmic-ray-induced correlated errors in superconducting
              qubit array", Springer Science and Business Media LLC,
              Nature Communications vol. 16, no. 1,
              DOI 10.1038/s41467-025-59778-z, May 2025,
              <https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-59778-z>.

   [litinski-gosc]
              Litinski, D., "A Game of Surface Codes: Large-Scale
              Quantum Computing with Lattice Surgery", Verein zur
              Forderung des Open Access Publizierens in den
              Quantenwissenschaften, Quantum vol. 3, pp. 128,
              DOI 10.22331/q-2019-03-05-128, March 2019,
              <https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2019-03-05-128>.

   [mahadev-homomorphic]
              Mahadev, U., "Classical Homomorphic Encryption for Quantum
              Circuits", Society for Industrial & Applied Mathematics
              (SIAM), SIAM Journal on Computing vol. 52, no. 6, pp.
              FOCS18-189-FOCS18-215, DOI 10.1137/18m1231055, December
              2020, <https://doi.org/10.1137/18m1231055>.

   [martinis-correlated]
              Martinis, J., "Saving superconducting quantum processors
              from decay and correlated errors generated by gamma and
              cosmic rays", Springer Science and Business Media LLC, npj
              Quantum Information vol. 7, no. 1,
              DOI 10.1038/s41534-021-00431-0, June 2021,
              <https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-021-00431-0>.




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 46]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   [mayers-unconditional]
              Mayers, D., "Unconditional security in Quantum
              Cryptography", arXiv,  arXiv, DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.QUANT-
              PH/9802025, 1998,
              <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.QUANT-PH/9802025>.

   [meignant-dgs]
              Meignant, C., Markham, D., and F. Grosshans, "Distributing
              graph states over arbitrary quantum networks", American
              Physical Society (APS), Physical Review A vol. 100, no. 5,
              DOI 10.1103/physreva.100.052333, November 2019,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.100.052333>.

   [mori-psds]
              Mori, Y., Sasaki, T., Ikuta, R., Teramoto, K., Ohno, H.,
              Hajdušek, M., Van Meter, R., and S. Nagayama, "Scalable
              Timing Coordination of Bell State Analyzers in Quantum
              Networks", IEEE, 2024 IEEE International Conference on
              Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) pp. 1890-1896,
              DOI 10.1109/qce60285.2024.00218, September 2024,
              <https://doi.org/10.1109/qce60285.2024.00218>.

   [morimae-blind]
              Morimae, T. and K. Fujii, "Blind quantum computation
              protocol in which Alice only makes measurements", American
              Physical Society (APS), Physical Review A vol. 87, no. 5,
              DOI 10.1103/physreva.87.050301, May 2013,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.87.050301>.

   [muralidharan-generations]
              Muralidharan, S., Li, L., Kim, J., Lütkenhaus, N., Lukin,
              M., and L. Jiang, "Optimal architectures for long distance
              quantum communication", Springer Science and Business
              Media LLC, Scientific Reports vol. 6, no. 1,
              DOI 10.1038/srep20463, February 2016,
              <https://doi.org/10.1038/srep20463>.

   [nist-singles]
              Bienfang, J., Gerrits, T., Kuo, P., Migdall, A., Polyakov,
              S., and O. Slattery, "Single-photon Sources and Detectors
              Dictionary", National Institute of Standards and
              Technology, DOI 10.6028/nist.ir.8486r1, August 2025,
              <https://doi.org/10.6028/nist.ir.8486r1>.








Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 47]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   [proctor-multiparm]
              Proctor, T., Knott, P., and J. Dunningham, "Multiparameter
              Estimation in Networked Quantum Sensors", American
              Physical Society (APS), Physical Review Letters vol. 120,
              no. 8, DOI 10.1103/physrevlett.120.080501, February 2018,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.120.080501>.

   [proctor-quantum-sensing]
              Proctor, T., Knott, P., and J. Dunningham, "Networked
              quantum sensing", arXiv, DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.1702.04271,
              2017, <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1702.04271>.

   [ramette-remote]
              Ramette, J., Sinclair, J., Breuckmann, N., and V. Vuletić,
              "Fault-tolerant connection of error-corrected qubits with
              noisy links", Springer Science and Business Media LLC, npj
              Quantum Information vol. 10, no. 1,
              DOI 10.1038/s41534-024-00855-4, June 2024,
              <https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-024-00855-4>.

   [rdv-thesis]
              Van Meter III, R. D., "Architecture of a Quantum
              Multicomputer Optimized for Shor's Factoring Algorithm",
              Ph.D. Dissertation, Keio University, 2006,
              <https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0607065>.

   [res-mgmt-het]
              Benchasattabuse, N., "Resource Management in Heterogeneous
              Quantum Repeater Networks", Ph.D. Dissertation, Keio
              University, 2025,
              <https://aqua.sfc.wide.ad.jp/publications/whit3z-thesis-
              local-compiled.pdf>.

   [RFC1122]  Braden, R., Ed., "Requirements for Internet Hosts -
              Communication Layers", STD 3, RFC 1122,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC1122, October 1989,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1122>.

   [RFC1123]  Braden, R., Ed., "Requirements for Internet Hosts -
              Application and Support", STD 3, RFC 1123,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC1123, October 1989,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1123>.

   [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>.



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 48]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   [RFC9583]  Wang, C., Rahman, A., Li, R., Aelmans, M., and K.
              Chakraborty, "Application Scenarios for the Quantum
              Internet", RFC 9583, DOI 10.17487/RFC9583, June 2024,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9583>.

   [sakuma-q-fly]
              Sakuma, D., Tsuno, T., Shimizu, H., Kurosawa, Y.,
              Friedrich, M., Teramoto, K., Taherkhani, A., Todd, A.,
              Ueno, Y., Hajdušek, M., Ikuta, R., Van Meter, R., Sasaki,
              T., and S. Nagayama, "Q-Fly: An Optical Interconnect for
              Modular Quantum Computers", arXiv,
              DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.2412.09299, 2024,
              <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2412.09299>.

   [sane-jobs]
              Sane, B., Hajdušek, M., and R. Van Meter, "Optimizing
              Resource Allocation in a Distributed Quantum Computing
              Cloud: A Game-Theoretic Approach", arXiv,
              DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.2504.18298, 2025,
              <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2504.18298>.

   [sane-phonons]
              Sane, B., Meter, R., and M. Hajdusek, "Fight or Flight:
              Cosmic Ray-Induced Phonons and the Quantum Surface
              Code<sup>*</sup>", IEEE, 2023 IEEE International
              Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) pp.
              1378-1388, DOI 10.1109/qce57702.2023.00156, September
              2023, <https://doi.org/10.1109/qce57702.2023.00156>.

   [schoute-shortcuts]
              Schoute, E., Mancinska, L., Islam, T., Kerenidis, I., and
              S. Wehner, "Shortcuts to quantum network routing", arXiv,
              DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.1610.05238, 2016,
              <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1610.05238>.

   [shapourian-qdc-infra]
              Shapourian, H., Kaur, E., Sewell, T., Zhao, J., Kilzer,
              M., Kompella, R., and R. Nejabati, "Quantum Data Center
              Infrastructures: A Scalable Architectural Design
              Perspective", arXiv, DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.2501.05598, 2025,
              <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2501.05598>.

   [sinclair-ft-interconnect]
              Sinclair, J., Ramette, J., Grinkemeyer, B., Bluvstein, D.,
              Lukin, M., and V. Vuletić, "Fault-tolerant optical
              interconnects for neutral-atom arrays", arXiv,
              DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.2408.08955, 2024,
              <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2408.08955>.



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 49]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   [sutcliffe-dist-qec]
              Sutcliffe, E., Jonnadula, B., Le Gall, C., Moylett, A.,
              and C. Westoby, "Distributed Quantum Error Correction
              Based on Hyperbolic Floquet Codes", IEEE, 2025 IEEE
              International Conference on Quantum Computing and
              Engineering (QCE) pp. 649-657,
              DOI 10.1109/qce65121.2025.00076, August 2025,
              <https://doi.org/10.1109/qce65121.2025.00076>.

   [taherkhani-byz]
              Taherkhani, M., Navi, K., and R. Meter, "Resource-aware
              system architecture model for implementation of quantum
              aided Byzantine agreement on quantum repeater networks",
              IOP Publishing, Quantum Science and Technology vol. 3, no.
              1, pp. 014011, DOI 10.1088/2058-9565/aa9bb1, December
              2017, <https://doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/aa9bb1>.

   [van-meter-opt-timing]
              Van Meter, R., Satoh, T., Nagayama, S., Matsuo, T., and S.
              Suzuki, "Optimizing Timing of High-Success-Probability
              Quantum Repeaters", arXiv, DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.1701.04586,
              2017, <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1701.04586>.

   [van-meter-q-net-book]
              Van Meter, R., "Quantum Networking", Wiley,
              DOI 10.1002/9781118648919, ISBN ["9781848215375",
              "9781118648919"], April 2014,
              <https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118648919>.

   [van-meter-qi-arch]
              Van Meter, R., Satoh, R., Benchasattabuse, N., Teramoto,
              K., Matsuo, T., Hajdusek, M., Satoh, T., Nagayama, S., and
              S. Suzuki, "A Quantum Internet Architecture", IEEE, 2022
              IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and
              Engineering (QCE) pp. 341-352,
              DOI 10.1109/qce53715.2022.00055, September 2022,
              <https://doi.org/10.1109/qce53715.2022.00055>.

   [vepsaelaeinen-ionizing]
              Vepsäläinen, A., Karamlou, A., Orrell, J., Dogra, A.,
              Loer, B., Vasconcelos, F., Kim, D., Melville, A.,
              Niedzielski, B., Yoder, J., Gustavsson, S., Formaggio, J.,
              VanDevender, B., and W. Oliver, "Impact of ionizing
              radiation on superconducting qubit coherence", Springer
              Science and Business Media LLC, Nature vol. 584, no. 7822,
              pp. 551-556, DOI 10.1038/s41586-020-2619-8, August 2020,
              <https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2619-8>.




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 50]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   [wu-mitigating]
              Wu, X., Joshi, Y., Yan, H., Andersson, G., Anferov, A.,
              Conner, C., Karimi, B., King, A., Li, S., Malc, H.,
              Miller, J., Mishra, H., Qiao, H., Ryu, M., Xing, S., Shi,
              J., and A. Cleland, "Mitigating cosmic-ray-like correlated
              events with a modular quantum processor", American
              Physical Society (APS), Physical Review Applied vol. 24,
              no. 4, DOI 10.1103/4ctq-r6w6, October 2025,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/4ctq-r6w6>.

   [xu-dist-qec]
              Xu, Q., Seif, A., Yan, H., Mannucci, N., Sane, B., Van
              Meter, R., Cleland, A., and L. Jiang, "Distributed Quantum
              Error Correction for Chip-Level Catastrophic Errors",
              American Physical Society (APS), Physical Review
              Letters vol. 129, no. 24,
              DOI 10.1103/physrevlett.129.240502, December 2022,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.129.240502>.

   [yin-1200km]
              Yin, J., Cao, Y., Li, Y., Liao, S., Zhang, L., Ren, J.,
              Cai, W., Liu, W., Li, B., Dai, H., Li, G., Lu, Q., Gong,
              Y., Xu, Y., Li, S., Li, F., Yin, Y., Jiang, Z., Li, M.,
              Jia, J., Ren, G., He, D., Zhou, Y., Zhang, X., Wang, N.,
              Chang, X., Zhu, Z., Liu, N., Chen, Y., Lu, C., Shu, R.,
              Peng, C., Wang, J., and J. Pan, "Satellite-based
              entanglement distribution over 1200 kilometers", American
              Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS),
              Science vol. 356, no. 6343, pp. 1140-1144,
              DOI 10.1126/science.aan3211, June 2017,
              <https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan3211>.

   [yoder-tour-de-gross]
              Yoder, T., Schoute, E., Rall, P., Pritchett, E., Gambetta,
              J., Cross, A., Carroll, M., and M. Beverland, "Tour de
              gross: A modular quantum computer based on bivariate
              bicycle codes", arXiv, DOI 10.48550/ARXIV.2506.03094,
              2025, <https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2506.03094>.

   [zukowski-entanglement-swapping]
              Kaszlikowski, D., Kwek, L., Chen, J., Żukowski, M., and C.
              Oh, "Clauser-Horne inequality for three-state systems",
              American Physical Society (APS), Physical Review A vol.
              65, no. 3, DOI 10.1103/physreva.65.032118, February 2002,
              <https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.65.032118>.

Contributors




Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 51]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


   Michal Hajdusek
   Keio University
   5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa
   252-0882
   Japan


   Michal was involved in document development and technical discussions
   from the beginning.

   Andrew Todd
   Keio University
   5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa
   252-0882
   Japan


   Andrew leads the software team implementing much of the network, and
   provides feedback on system structure.

   Monet Tokuyama Friedrich
   Keio University
   5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa
   252-0882
   Japan


   Contributed presentations and clarity; reviewed this document;
   authoring related specifications.

   Shota Nagayama
   Keio University
   5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa
   252-0882
   Japan


   Contributed presentations and clarity; reviewed this document and
   related documents; technical and managerial leadership.

   Akihito Soeda
   National Institute for Informatics
   2-1-2 Hitotsubashi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo
   101-8430
   Japan


   Technical and managerial discussions.



Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 52]

Internet-Draft                     QNA                        March 2026


Authors' Addresses

   Rodney Van Meter
   Keio University
   5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa
   252-0882
   Japan
   Email: rdv@sfc.wide.ad.jp


   Naphan Benchasattabuse
   Keio University
   5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa
   252-0882
   Japan
   Email: whit3z@sfc.wide.ad.jp


   Amin Taherkhani
   Keio University
   5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa
   252-0882
   Japan
   Email: amin@sfc.wide.ad.jp



























Van Meter, et al.       Expires 17 September 2026              [Page 53]
