There are no discussions over extending the ceasefire between the US and Iran, according to reports citing a senior Iranian source; one issue being discussed is the US returning to the MoU and defining a time frame for implementation

• From Iran's perspective, there was no ceasefire start date so there is nothing to extend.
• The US violated the interim pact 48 hours after it was reached.

Ceasefires of this kind, brokered without an agreed commencement or monitoring framework, have historically been fragile from the outset, and disputes over whether a truce ever formally began are a recurring feature rather than a novelty. The pattern in comparable episodes is that each side's narrative diverges immediately: one treats the pause as conditional and time-bound, the other as open-ended, and the gap is only ever closed by a written implementation schedule, which is precisely what the reported reference to the MoU and a defined time frame points to. The transmission channel to energy markets in past Iran-related escalations has run through the risk premium on crude, specifically the front of the curve and freight and insurance costs around Gulf transit, with the premium unwinding when de-escalation is codified and rebuilding when it remains verbal. Claims of violation within days of an interim pact have tended to precede either a rapid return to hostilities or a re-negotiation under mediation, and the presence of an active discussion on implementation leans toward the latter for now. What is worth watching is whether mediators table a formal document, whether official channels in Washington confirm or contradict the source's framing, and any movement in shipping advisories or tanker rates through the Strait. As single-source reporting attributed to one side, the signal is directional rather than conclusive.