Comment by hobofan

Main points that came to my mind:

- I think the comparison to TCP/DNS/BGP is the more apt one compared to MCP/A2A

- Those protocols negotiate capabilities and exchange information about themselves, but not in a self-serving manner of just talking about themselves, but with the goal of ultimately transporting data for a higher layer. Ask Protocol lacks that.

- Objects don't exist in a vacuum, but in a context. As the objects will only know about themselves they will always be limited in how to describe themselves best. An LLM that lives on the outside and just gets a static description of an object will be in a much better description to answer an "ask" query.

- Given that the existing agent protocols you are putting it in a context in already come with "description" fields and the like, the protocol seems too little of a value add to actually target. e.g. there is no benefit for a MCP server to conform to the prescribed manifest rather than implementing a freeform "ask" tool.

- If you want to actually bring the point across that it "occupies a different position" than transport/agent protocols, don't put it into a comparison matrix where you force it into the same schema

- ("Open Source" doesn't count as governance)