Solutions

Residency as a hard constraint, not a preference

Region and provider restrictions are evaluated before any ranking. A cheaper model in the wrong jurisdiction is not a trade-off to weigh; it is not a candidate.

The problem

Most routing systems treat residency as a scoring input. That means a sufficiently large cost or quality advantage can outvote it — which is exactly the property a residency rule exists to prevent.

How Planverity addresses it

Excluded before scored

Allowed and denied regions and providers filter the candidate set. Nothing downstream can reintroduce an excluded endpoint, because ranking only ever orders what survived.

Data classification drives requirements

A classification can require endpoints to carry specific tags — EU processing, no-training — and all listed tags must be present. An endpoint missing one is infeasible, not merely deprioritised.

Local processing where required

Embedding and semantic features are provider-neutral by construction: a self-hosted endpoint speaking the same shape drops in with no code change, for data classes that must not leave the estate.

We verify tags, not jurisdictions

Planverity enforces the residency metadata recorded in your registry. It does not independently audit where a provider actually processes data — that assurance comes from your contract with them, and the registry is where you record it.

Other solutions