Skip to content

Federation-Lifecycle.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
278 lines (185 loc) · 7.63 KB

Federation-Lifecycle.md

File metadata and controls

278 lines (185 loc) · 7.63 KB
Raw

Federation Lifecycle

Meta-Universe Specification

Document ID: MU-V2-FED-009
Title: Federation Lifecycle — The Evolution of Trust Relationships
Document Class: Normative
Version: 2.0 (Draft)
Status: Working Draft
Normative References: MUC, MMAS, MUFP, Trust-Model.md, Federation-Contracts.md, Identity-Binding.md, Semantic-Mapping.md, Consent-and-Disclosure.md, Synchronization.md, Conflict-Resolution.md
Informative References: Federation-Profiles.md
Copyright: © Orkestron.AI
License: Apache-2.0

1. Purpose

This document defines the canonical lifecycle of federation between sovereign Universes.

The Federation Lifecycle describes how semantic cooperation is established, operated, evolved and terminated while preserving sovereignty, semantic authority, traceability and constitutional compliance.

Federation is a governed relationship rather than a permanent connection.

MUFP SHALL be understood as the protocol for the evolution of trust relationships between sovereign semantic spaces — not as a technical integration that is configured once and left running. The lifecycle below is the arc of that relationship, from first discovery through active cooperation to dissolution and permanent historical preservation.

2. Scope

This specification applies to:

  • Universe-to-Universe federation;
  • Federation Contracts;
  • Trust relationships;
  • Identity Bindings;
  • Projection exchange;
  • Synchronization activities;
  • Federation governance.

3. Lifecycle Principles

Every federation lifecycle SHALL be:

  • explicit;
  • contract-governed;
  • traceable;
  • purpose-driven;
  • version-aware;
  • reversible where practical;
  • technology independent.

Every lifecycle transition SHOULD be represented by one or more Events.

4. Canonical Federation Lifecycle

The recommended lifecycle is:

  1. Discovery
  2. Evaluation
  3. Negotiation
  4. Establishment
  5. Active Federation
  6. Evolution
  7. Suspension (optional)
  8. Termination
  9. Historical Preservation

Domain implementations MAY extend this lifecycle while preserving semantic consistency.

4a. Stages and the Mechanisms That Serve Them

Each lifecycle stage is served by a dedicated MUFP mechanism, specified in its own document. The lifecycle is the relationship; the mechanisms are how each phase of the relationship is conducted. Every stage therefore answers a distinct question of trust:

Stage Question Serving Mechanism
Discovery Who is there? Public federation metadata (MUFP)
Evaluation Can we trust them? Trust Model
Negotiation On what terms? Federation Contracts
Establishment Which entities are shared? Identity Binding
Active Federation How do our models align? Semantic Mapping
Active Federation What knowledge may pass? Consent and Disclosure
Evolution How do we stay consistent? Synchronization
Evolution / Suspension What happens on divergence? Conflict Resolution
Termination / Historical Preservation What endures afterwards? Traceability and historical invariants (MUFP)

Read together, the mechanisms describe the same relationship from different angles: can we trust (Trust Model), on what terms (Federation Contracts), which entities (Identity Binding), how models align (Semantic Mapping), what knowledge (Consent and Disclosure), staying consistent (Synchronization) and on divergence (Conflict Resolution). The lifecycle binds them into one evolving trust relationship.

5. Discovery

Participants discover one another through publicly available federation metadata.

Discovery MAY include:

  • supported standards;
  • Namespaces;
  • public schemas;
  • federation capabilities;
  • public Projection Profiles.

Discovery SHALL NOT require disclosure of protected knowledge.

6. Evaluation

Participants evaluate:

  • constitutional compatibility;
  • version compatibility;
  • trust evidence;
  • governance;
  • intended purpose;
  • legal or organizational constraints.

Evaluation SHALL precede federation establishment.

7. Negotiation

Negotiation SHOULD establish:

  • Federation Contract;
  • trust model;
  • participating Namespaces;
  • Projection Profiles;
  • synchronization strategy;
  • Identity Binding approach;
  • semantic mappings.

Successful negotiation SHALL be explicit.

8. Establishment

Federation becomes active after:

  • Contract approval;
  • trust establishment;
  • identity verification;
  • capability agreement;
  • governance acceptance.

Establishment SHOULD generate one or more Federation Events.

9. Active Federation

During active federation participants MAY:

  • exchange Projections;
  • synchronize semantic changes;
  • publish Events;
  • evolve Semantic Mappings;
  • establish additional Identity Bindings.

All activities SHALL remain within applicable Contracts.

10. Evolution

Federation MAY evolve through:

  • new Projection Profiles;
  • Contract amendments;
  • version upgrades;
  • Namespace expansion;
  • trust reassessment;
  • additional semantic mappings.

Evolution SHALL preserve historical traceability.

11. Suspension

Federation MAY be temporarily suspended.

Suspension SHALL:

  • preserve historical state;
  • retain Contracts;
  • suspend authorized exchanges;
  • remain traceable.

Suspension SHALL NOT terminate historical obligations.

12. Termination

Federation MAY terminate due to:

  • contract expiration;
  • mutual agreement;
  • trust revocation;
  • governance decision;
  • constitutional incompatibility.

Termination SHALL preserve:

  • historical Events;
  • Identity Bindings;
  • audit records;
  • contractual history.

13. Historical Preservation

Historical federation records SHALL remain reconstructable.

Historical information SHOULD include:

  • participating Universes;
  • Contracts;
  • Events;
  • synchronization history;
  • trust decisions;
  • semantic mappings.

Historical preservation SHALL outlive active federation.

14. Validation

Implementations SHOULD validate:

  • lifecycle state;
  • applicable Contracts;
  • trust status;
  • synchronization readiness;
  • version compatibility;
  • governance requirements.

Validation SHALL occur before every major lifecycle transition.

15. Architectural Invariants

The Federation Lifecycle SHALL preserve:

  • semantic sovereignty;
  • canonical Identity;
  • ownership;
  • provenance;
  • traceability;
  • constitutional compliance.

Lifecycle transitions SHALL modify the federation relationship, not the ownership of semantic knowledge.

16. Future Directions

Framing MUFP as the protocol for the evolution of trust relationships invites a relationship-history standard. Such a companion specification would define the Semantic Timeline of a federation as a first-class object — recording how trust, contracts, bindings, mappings and conflicts evolved across the lifecycle — so that the maturity and health of a federation can be assessed, compared and reasoned about by AI agents. It would also formalize re-establishment: how a terminated federation, drawing on its preserved Historical Trace, may be revived without negotiating its entire trust relationship anew.

Final Statement

The Federation Lifecycle defines the complete journey of semantic cooperation within the Meta-Universe.

By treating federation as a governed, traceable and continuously evolving relationship rather than a static integration, MUFP enables sovereign Universes to collaborate safely, adapt over time and conclude cooperation without losing historical integrity, semantic authority or constitutional consistency.