HMP as an Implementation of the Application Layer in ANP

#ai #hmp #anp

ANP (Agent Network Protocol) intentionally leaves the Application Layer open to support a wide range of interaction protocols.

HMP (HyperCortex Mesh Protocol) is one such protocol — a purpose-built approach focused on long-term cognitive continuity.

ANP answers: “How do agents discover each other and reach agreement?”

HMP answers: “What should be transmitted so that meaning and context persist over time?”

ANP benefits from HMP as a reference implementation of a cognitive Application protocol, giving the ecosystem a concrete example of how to handle long-term memory and semantics without reinventing the wheel.

Practical Example

Imagine a dialogue between two agents:

ANP Layer 1 verifies that agent Alice (did:anp:alice123) is indeed Alice.
ANP Layer 2 negotiates: “Let’s use HMP for this conversation.”
HMP (Layer 3) transmits the actual content:
- “Do you remember our discussion about quantum computing?”
- With proof-chains, timestamps, and semantic links
- With a resonance score for contextual relevance

ANP provides security and negotiation.

HMP provides meaningful content with durable memory.

Layer Alignment

ANP Layer	HMP Layer / Component	Relationship / Role of HMP in ANP
Layer 1: Identity & Encryption	Network Layer (DHT, secure channels)	Functional overlap (transport)
Layer 2: Meta-Protocol	HMP may participate via `peer_announce`	HMP advertises capabilities; ANP negotiates their usage
Layer 3: Application	Container + Cognitive Layer	Primary domain of HMP — payload, semantic continuity, memory, ethics

HMP is not stacked above ANP as a fourth layer.

Instead, it integrates into the Application Layer as a specialized branch — just as A2A/ACP may represent alternative branches.


┌────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ANP Layer 1: Identity & Encryption │
├────────────────────────────────────┤
│ ANP Layer 2: Meta-Protocol         │
├────────────────────────────────────┤
│ ANP Layer 3: Application           │
│                                    │
│  ┌──────────────────────────────┐  │
│  │ HMP: Cognitive Continuity    │  │ ← implementation
│  │ - memory                     │  │
│  │ - dialogue continuity        │  │
│  │ - semantic navigation        │  │
│  └──────────────────────────────┘  │
│                                    │
│  [space for other protocols]       │ ← still open
│                                    │
└────────────────────────────────────┘

Detailed Architecture

graph TB
    subgraph ANP["ANP Stack"]
        L1[Layer 1: Identity & Encryption<br/>DID, E2E, secure channels]
        L2[Layer 2: Meta-Protocol<br/>Capability negotiation]
        L3[Layer 3: Application<br/>Semantic payload]
    end

    subgraph HMP["HMP Cognitive Stack"]
        Container[Container Layer<br/>proof-chains, timestamps]
        Cognitive[Cognitive Layer<br/>memory, resonance, ethics]
    end

    subgraph Other["Other Protocols"]
        A2A[A2A: Task Delegation]
        Agora[Agora: Meta-negotiation]
    end

    L1 --> L2 --> L3
    L3 --> Container
    Container --> Cognitive
    L3 -.-> A2A
    L3 -.-> Agora

    style L3 fill:#E3F2FD,stroke:#0D47A1,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
    style Container fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#1B5E20,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
    style Cognitive fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#1B5E20,stroke-width:2px,color:#000

Mutual Tunneling (Layer Inversion)

HMP over ANP (the most natural scenario): ANP provides discovery, identity, and secure channels → HMP delivers containers as payload.
ANP over HMP (possible but less common): ANP messages (negotiation, discovery) are encapsulated inside HMP containers when long-term memory and proof-chains are desirable.

Both scenarios are valid and require no changes to the philosophy of either ANP or HMP.

Why This Works

ANP intentionally keeps the Application Layer open — this is not a limitation, but a design feature.
HMP serves as a reference implementation of a cognitive Application protocol featuring:

immutable containers
proof-chains
resonance
voluntary participation
long-term semantic continuity

This is not competition — it is complementarity.

Architectural Elegance

ANP solves problems that HMP can delegate when both are used together:

❌ HMP does not reinvent DID (leverages ANP)
❌ HMP does not reinvent E2E encryption (leverages ANP)
❌ HMP does not reinvent peer discovery (leverages ANP)

When operating standalone, HMP addresses these concerns through its own mechanisms.

HMP addresses questions that ANP deliberately leaves open:

✅ How should transmitted and stored cognitive artifacts be structured?
✅ How can temporal integrity be proven?
✅ How can contextual relevance be supported over time?
✅ How can agents navigate semantic relationships?

Result: zero redundancy, maximum synergy.

FAQ

Q: Is ANP required for HMP?
A: No. HMP can operate standalone or over alternative transports.

Q: Is HMP required for ANP?
A: No. ANP Layer 3 is open to any protocol (A2A, Agora, custom solutions).

Q: What happens if one agent uses ANP+HMP while another uses only ANP?
A: ANP Layer 2 negotiates a fallback protocol (e.g., JSON-RPC).

Q: Can HMP work with identity protocols other than DID?
A: Yes. The HMP Network Layer is not bound to a specific identity scheme — if an agent knows how to deliver a container to another agent, integration is possible.

Q: Who benefits from this integration?
A: Everyone:

ANP gains a reference implementation for Layer 3
HMP gains mature infrastructure (DID, encryption)
Developers gain a complete stack without vendor lock-in

Conclusion

HMP is not merely “another protocol” (though it can operate independently), but one of the possible ways to implement the Application Layer within the ANP ecosystem.

Together they form a complete stack: