F35-RI: Yes
Archived previous-definition assessment — revision 5.73. Retired in 5.82; excluded from the active matrix and counts. This historical verdict is not a current assessment.
Rationale
RPL distinguishes leaf-only endpoints from forwarding routers. Adding intermediate routers to the existing non-storing OF0 domain extends reachability beyond direct root attachment while leaf implementations and UDP/DTLS applications remain unchanged. Existing DIO/DAO behavior establishes reachability, and the root supplies downward source routes through the added routers.
Assessment method
Primary specification review; no runtime experiment
Source context
RPL RFCs and pinned Linux NET/ROM routing daemon
Outstanding qualification
Before/after witness: a directly attached leaf/root topology gains a routed branch through newly deployed RPL routers. The leaf already supports the selected non-storing endpoint behavior and RFC 6554 handling; no leaf is required to become a router. Configure compatible OF0/MOP, the same ULA domain, neighbor registration, IEEE 802.15.4 links and link-security keys. Intermediate routers process routing headers but do not terminate final-pair DTLS. Added routers and root routing state require administration and resources. No conversion of non-RPL legacy endpoints, sleep negotiation, seamless mobility or complete executable integration is claimed.
Public sources
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6550.html#section-16.2
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6550.html#section-16.3
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6554.html#section-2
Editorial evidence references
The following identifiers refer to research records not included in this public package; they are not public links.
- round522.html
- round522-sources.json