Participant Relationship Protocol

Back to matrix

F09-CG: Yes

Rationale

Architectural composition witness: send copies of one critical bundle over two CGR routes with different next hops and overlapping feasible contacts, using distinct TCPCLv4/TLS sessions on independently usable IP paths. The pinned ION BP forwarding path clones and enqueues the same bundle for eligible next hops; RFC 9174 section 5.2.2 explicitly permits simultaneous transfers through multiple TCPCL sessions. The one-session non-interleaving rule is not a cross-session serialization requirement. This establishes supported composition at specification level, not measured concurrent delivery by an integrated pinned implementation.

Assessment method

Explicit specification-level composition; integration unqualified

Source context

RFC 9174 section 5.2.2 plus pinned ION critical-bundle routing

Outstanding qualification

Configure two independently usable IP paths, overlapping contacts and separate authenticated TCPCLv4/TLS sessions. Correlate the same original bundle identity on both payload-bearing transfers and demonstrate temporal overlap. Do not substitute queue overlap, probes, different bundles or sequential failover. Verify the exact TCPCLv4 integration independently of the pinned BP-layer source. No bandwidth gain or delivery guarantee is inferred. Inspection of the pinned bpv7/tcp/tcpcli.c finds an emitted TCPCL version 0x03 header. That adapter is not an executable TCPCLv4/TLS witness; the Yes remains a specification-level composition, not certification of this ION adapter.

Public sources

Editorial evidence references

The following identifiers refer to research records not included in this public package; they are not public links.