Back to matrix

G05-IP: Yes

Rationale

IPv6 supplies the namespace while prefix aggregation separates inter-domain routing state from individual endpoint count. The selected BGP/MP-BGP control plane and regional/provider hierarchy provide a credible global construction; CIDR's deployment experience is documented in RFC 4632. This satisfies plausibility using the same evidentiary standard as PRP, without requiring a new ten-billion-device test. The retained plausibility inference uses conventional Internet regional/provider routing, rather than a bespoke substitute physical topology; MQ/HIP add peer-local connection/association state. It is documentary architectural evidence, not a completed paired scenario execution.

Assessment method

Architectural plausibility assessment using documented evidence

Source context

RFC 4632 sections 3–5 and 9; RFC 4291 addressing architecture

Outstanding qualification

Credit applies to the selected IPv4/IPv6 composition with IPv6 for address-space growth, not ten billion unique public IPv4 addresses. Deaggregation, multihoming, churn and provisioning affect resources. No simultaneous certification of the historical numeric targets or exact current endpoint count is asserted. Use the same Internet-shaped regional infrastructure, population, access workload and contemporary equipment envelope for every composition. Protocol-specific routing, discovery, caching and placement policies may differ on that infrastructure. Do not substitute a more favorable physical topology, omit regions, silently add links or assume an independently chosen cache-hit rate. Count additional equipment and its placement explicitly under the same resource envelope. An evidenced inability to serve this common setting can justify No; impossibility in every imaginable topology is not required. Missing evidence remains Pending.

Public sources

Editorial evidence references

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