Two follow-ups to the OP: one technical addendum, one pointer to the broader public framing.
On implementation, the contract primitive underneath an Authority policy lookup layer isn’t speculative. A two-contract pattern — orchestrator holding claim/timelock state, focused verifier consuming a precompile-backed proof against onchain state — is already deployed on Sepolia as a DNSSEC-based TLD-claim system (demo here).
Swap the proof type from DNSSEC RRSIG to WebAuthn or ecrecover and the architectural seam is the one an Authority-layer implementation would need. Wiring an ENS-resolved authority record is net-new, but the mapping underneath has been field-tested.
On positioning, for readers outside the forum, I wrote up the demand-side framing yesterday—cb.id as the per-platform-user precedent + a named MARP example, and Entra Agent ID as the closed alternative already shipping.
Open to questions on either layer.