F39-HP: Yes
Rationale
RFC 5338 describes assigning HITs to internal virtual interfaces and using them in ordinary socket calls, binding services to a selected HIT, and applications connecting to a local HIT. The same HIT-and-port reference addresses a co-resident service or a remote host service while the HIP layer handles remote locators.
Assessment method
Primary RFC application and socket semantics; explicit local-HIT case
Source context
RFC 5338 section 5; HIPv2 identity/locator separation
Outstanding qualification
Architectural/documentary credit based on the explicit local-HIT case, not a newly executed HIPv2 deployment. Use the chosen local HIT for UDP replies as well as requests to avoid the documented wildcard/multiple-HIT ambiguity. RFC 5338 permits relaxed local security processing; this does not assert identical local/remote protection or change the selected remote ESP suite. No zero-copy, process migration or independent per-process key ownership is required or claimed.
Public sources
- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5338#section-5
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7401.html
- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6317#section-4.1.1
Editorial evidence references
The following identifiers refer to research records not included in this public package; they are not public links.
- round696.html