[agent2agent] Re: candidate row for logical-agent continuity (draft-bu-agentproto-security-principal-binding-07, Sec 33 slot)

[Songbo Bu <[e-mail]>]

Hi Bradley, Yuning and Guigui,

Yes. For the candidate row we are refining, I will make the predecessor
requirement explicit in the recovery branch: the authenticated recovery
event names the specific earlier record by record identifier and digest,
and binds it to the current instance, identity incarnation, scope and
decision context under the selected profile's authority.

Issuer recovery or an eligible successor commitment changes the authority
for that relation; it does not remove the named-predecessor check. No
prior-key signature is implied. My earlier "different authenticated
historical anchor" wording was too open-ended for this row, so I would
replace it with that explicit requirement. A newly valid credential alone
remains a fresh instance-to-identity binding, not continuity.

One qualification to "cannot chain": an inspectable event missing its
mandatory reference, a mismatched digest, or a disqualified relation is
unsatisfied under the named rule. A properly named predecessor that cannot
currently be retrieved, or required status that is unavailable, remains
indeterminate. Neither can be promoted by current-instance authentication.

The attached clarification includes the recovery cases. I ran 46 local
synthetic checks, including reachable positive controls and deliberately
incomplete credential-only and identifier-lookup comparators. All stated
outcome/rule expectations matched. The fixture computes exact-byte hashes;
authentication, authority and status remain supplied premises, so this is
not a native cryptographic or independent interoperability result.

The candidate remains unnumbered and -07 is unchanged. Does this make the
recovery requirement explicit while preserving the unavailable-evidence
distinction?

Best,
Songbo