diff --git a/doc/spec.md b/doc/spec.md
index db7955e..9cbc0e1 100644
--- a/doc/spec.md
+++ b/doc/spec.md
@@ -461,7 +461,11 @@ file reconstruction information from a CAS rather than a URL. rustingface
 implements none of it.
 
 - **Downstream:** never advertise Xet capability. Clients then take the ordinary
-  resolve-and-redirect path.
+  resolve-and-redirect path. This is the half that has to keep working as the
+  Hub migrates, so the conformance suite runs a *Xet-capable* client — `hf_xet`
+  installs as a `huggingface_hub` dependency whether or not a user asks for it
+  — and asserts it still chooses HTTP. Testing it with Xet disabled client-side
+  would prove nothing about the configuration people actually run.
 - **Upstream:** set `HF_HUB_DISABLE_XET=1` semantics on outbound fetches so
   rustingface receives whole-file URLs via the Git LFS bridge, which reconstructs
   the file and returns a single resource URL for legacy clients. Storing whole
diff --git a/test/conformance/conformance.py b/test/conformance/conformance.py
index 7eb62df..3b52a34 100755
--- a/test/conformance/conformance.py
+++ b/test/conformance/conformance.py
@@ -208,9 +208,14 @@ def client_env(endpoint: str, home: Path) -> dict:
             "HF_ENDPOINT": endpoint,
             "HF_HOME": str(home),
             "HF_HUB_CACHE": str(home / "hub"),
-            # rustingface implements no Xet client and never advertises the
-            # capability; setting this makes the client's side explicit too.
-            "HF_HUB_DISABLE_XET": "1",
+            # Xet is deliberately *not* disabled here. `hf_xet` installs as a
+            # huggingface_hub dependency, so a real user's client is Xet-capable
+            # whether or not they asked for it, and the whole claim rustingface
+            # makes is that pointing HF_ENDPOINT at it works with the client
+            # people actually have. Setting HF_HUB_DISABLE_XET would test a
+            # configuration nobody runs, and would hide the one failure mode
+            # that matters here: a client choosing Xet against a service that
+            # implements none of it (spec §8).
             "HF_HUB_DISABLE_TELEMETRY": "1",
             "HF_HUB_DISABLE_PROGRESS_BARS": "1",
         }
@@ -270,6 +275,32 @@ meta = get_hf_file_metadata(url)
 print(json.dumps({{"commit": meta.commit_hash, "etag": meta.etag, "size": meta.size}}))
 """
 
+# The Xet negotiation, from the client's own side. `hf_xet` ships as a
+# huggingface_hub dependency, so a real user's client is Xet-capable whether or
+# not they asked for it. What keeps rustingface compatible is that the *server*
+# never advertises Xet: `parse_xet_file_data_from_response` returns None, and
+# `hf_hub_download` dispatches to plain HTTP (file_download.py, "if
+# xet_file_data is not None and is_xet_available()").
+#
+# Asserted from inside the client rather than by inspecting headers ourselves,
+# because the question is not "which headers did we send" but "what did the
+# client conclude from them".
+XET_FALLBACK = """
+import json
+from huggingface_hub import get_session, hf_hub_url
+from huggingface_hub.utils._runtime import is_xet_available
+from huggingface_hub.utils._xet import parse_xet_file_data_from_response
+
+url = hf_hub_url({repo!r}, "config.json", revision={revision!r})
+response = get_session().get(url, headers={{"Accept-Encoding": "identity"}}, allow_redirects=False)
+response.raise_for_status()
+print(json.dumps({{
+    "xet_capable": bool(is_xet_available()),
+    "xet_offered": parse_xet_file_data_from_response(response) is not None,
+    "xet_headers": sorted(h for h in response.headers if h.lower().startswith("x-xet-")),
+}}))
+"""
+
 MISSING_FILE = """
 import json
 from huggingface_hub import hf_hub_download
@@ -451,6 +482,37 @@ def main() -> int:
 
     results.check("model_info answers through rustingface", model_info)
 
+    def xet_capable_client_falls_back_to_http() -> None:
+        """The central compatibility claim: point HF_ENDPOINT here and it works.
+
+        Xet is the thing most likely to break that quietly. The Hub is moving to
+        it, `hf_xet` is installed alongside `huggingface_hub` whether or not the
+        user asked for it, and rustingface implements none of it (spec §8) --
+        deliberately, because a Xet-backed fetch would leave the bucket
+        unreadable without a Xet client. That only holds while the client
+        *chooses* HTTP, so assert the choice rather than assume it.
+        """
+        with Instance(args.binary, workdir, storage, open_upstream) as rf:
+            seen = json.loads(
+                run_client(XET_FALLBACK.format(repo=REPO, revision=REVISION), rf.endpoint, hf_home)
+            )
+        if not seen["xet_capable"]:
+            raise Failure(
+                "hf_xet is not installed, so this check proves nothing: it would pass against a "
+                "client that could not use Xet even if rustingface offered it. Install the pinned "
+                "requirements."
+            )
+        if seen["xet_offered"] or seen["xet_headers"]:
+            raise Failure(
+                "rustingface advertised Xet to the client "
+                f"(headers {seen['xet_headers']}). It implements none of it, and a client that "
+                "took that path would write a bucket nobody can read back without a Xet client, "
+                "which forfeits state portability (spec §8)."
+            )
+        print("    client is Xet-capable, rustingface offered no Xet, download stays on HTTP")
+
+    results.check("a Xet-capable client falls back to plain HTTP", xet_capable_client_falls_back_to_http)
+
     # ------------------------------------------------------------------
     # Failures are loud.
     # ------------------------------------------------------------------