Participant Relationship Protocol

Back to matrix

G05-MQ: Yes

Rationale

The global witness now explicitly uses IPv6 with conventional BGP/MP-BGP prefix routing. Its 128-bit namespace accommodates the reference population; regional/provider prefix aggregation avoids requiring one global route per device. QUIC connection and validated-path state is held by communicating peers. Known numeric peer locators are already part of this selected composition: delivery does not require network-wide identity search or a mandatory global peer catalog. Bounded peer working sets and a bounded number of paths allow participants and their state to be distributed across ordinary regional networks. Together these provide an architectural plausibility witness under G05, extending the same aggregated IPv6 underlay rationale used for IP. 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 inference for explicitly selected IPv6 composition

Source context

IPv6 addressing, multiprotocol BGP and peer-local protocol state

Outstanding qualification

This is an editorial plausibility inference, not a measured 10-billion-device deployment or a guarantee of the historical latency, memory and traffic sizing targets. It assumes aggregatable allocations and distributed demand, not arbitrary global deaggregation or all-to-all simultaneous sessions. Initial locators/trust are supplied as selected; arbitrary identity-to-locator discovery is not added. Historical IPv4 runtime and byte-budget evidence remains IPv4-only; no new IPv6 implementation test is claimed. 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.