F24-LT: Yes
Rationale
The selected LTP/SABR composition includes contact/range plans and clocks. LTP explicitly requires its operating environment to report scheduled starts/stops of peer communication and link availability; queued traffic and recovery timers accommodate interruptions. With the shared final-hop schedule controlling receiver availability, the receiver can listen at planned opportunities instead of continuously.
Assessment method
Primary specification and pinned code review; no runtime experiment
Source context
SABR contact plans, LTP operating schedules and BP/TCPCL
Outstanding qualification
The credited capability relies on the already selected supplied plans, implemented locally as matching transmitter and receiver operating schedules. Account for propagation, clock uncertainty, link startup and reverse report/acknowledgement opportunities; use guard intervals and apply updates consistently. LTP suspends/resumes recovery timers but does not program hardware sleep or negotiate schedules. BP retention remains subject to lifetime/storage and cancellation limits. Complete LTP/AOS binding, wake-controller execution and energy measurements remain unqualified; F27 stays No because externally supplied schedules are not participant negotiation.
Public sources
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5326.html#section-5
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5326.html#section-6.5
- https://ccsds.org/Pubs/734x3b1.pdf
Editorial evidence references
The following identifiers refer to research records not included in this public package; they are not public links.
- round506.html
- round506-sources.json