Assumed gate-first site comparison
C: 73/100 and eligible; A: FAIL; B: HOLDderived
| Value kind | derived — Derived values are guide calculations; their result is only as fixed as the stated inputs, scope, and method. |
|---|---|
| Scope | Exact preference arithmetic: weights .30/.20/.15/.15/.10/.10 sum to 1. A’s all-nine diagnostic score is 90/100 but water FAIL excludes it. B’s all-eight score is 80/100 but unknown route diversity holds it. C alone qualifies: 10×(.30×7+.20×8+.15×7+.15×7+.10×8+.10×7)=10×7.3=73/100. Closing B’s route gate at the same 100 Gb/s survivor capacity and 12 ms RTT, with other gates unchanged, makes eligible B=80 exceed C=73; a shared-duct failure instead keeps B out. No site evidence was measured. |
| As of | 2026-09 |
| Source | ESB Networks — method reference; guide scenario September 8, 2026. Inputs are assumed; results are derived. |
| Derivation | Weights[.30,.20,.15,.15,.10,.10]. C10*sum(weight*[7,8,7,7,8,7])=73. A90 failswater; B80 unknowndiversity and cannotrank. B becomeseligible and preferred only after assumedroutegateclosure. No actual site evidence. |
| Review | checking…review by 2027-03-08 · standard cadence |
| Recorded changes | last 2026-09-16 |
| Claim id | guide2-t26-site-memo |
Where the guide uses it
← Full numbers register — every date-stamped figure in the guide, with revision history.