C01-LT: Yes
Rationale
The selected BPv7/SABR/LTP composition can retain a singleton destination EID while switching the destination node's final contact from neighbor A to neighbor B. The supplied plan ends A-to-D and provides a usable route via B-to-D. SABR selects the contact sequence for the same destination node; each adjacent transfer uses the configured LTP engine and Encapsulation/AOS binding. Neither the bundle sender's destination EID nor its final-pair BPSec keys need replacement.
Assessment method
Primary documentation and pinned source review; no runtime experiment
Source context
libp2p native peerstore and address updates; BP/SABR over configured LTP contacts
Outstanding qualification
This is a planned change of final attachment, with correct EID-to-node, peer-to-engine and channel mappings already supplied and permitted for both contacts. LTP itself is an adjacent-link transfer protocol, not an independent end-to-end locator service. Fresh LTP sessions on different adjacencies are allowed; retention, expiration, capacity, return-path and contact timing constraints remain. Unplanned failures require a corrected plan or another usable planned opportunity. No automatic contact discovery, unrestricted identifier allocation, migration of an in-progress LTP session, or mission-wide conformance is inferred. The verdict is documentary plausibility at the selected composition's service boundary; complete executable BPv7/SABR/LTP/Encapsulation/AOS integration remains unqualified.
Public sources
- https://public.ccsds.org/Pubs/734x3b1.pdf
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5326.html#section-2
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5326.html#section-5
- https://ccsds.org/Pubs/734x1b1.pdf
Editorial evidence references
The following identifiers refer to research records not included in this public package; they are not public links.
- round535.html
- round535-sources.json