Back to matrix

F32-BP: No

Rationale

BPv7 section 5.4 delegates selection of forwarding nodes and convergence-layer adapters to routing information and policy. The selected Secure DTN composition supplies static/aggregate forwarding exits and TCPCL, but no future-contact plan with capacity-aware route computation. Retaining a bundle until forwarding becomes possible does not satisfy F32.

Assessment method

Primary specification and pinned code review; no runtime experiment

Source context

Pinned cjdns source, BP forwarding and Meshtastic store-forward

Outstanding qualification

BP can host schedule-aware routing, including CGR/SABR, which is separately selected in other columns. The use of ION as a witness for specific BPSec mechanisms does not select every ION routing facility. This No concerns the listed composition rather than a limitation imposed on all BP deployments. Existing store-and-forward and interruption support remain credited independently.

Public sources

• https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9171.html#section-5.4
• 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.

• round509.html
• round509-sources.json