Following the system architecture, system requirements are broken down and assigned to items; at that point the ARP's guidance gives way to DO-178C (software) and DO-254 (electronic hardware), which happens once the architecture, the redundancy management and the breakdown of requirements are finished. The data passed to the item processes include: requirements allocated to hardware items and to software items; item development assurance levels with a description of associated failure conditions where applicable; the failure rate budgets and exposure intervals allotted to hardware failures; the system description; design constraints such as function isolation, separation, data or models of external interfacing elements, partitioning and any item development independence requirements; system verification activities to be done at item level; and evidence that the system process has accepted any item-process data it has assessed, for example its evaluation of derived requirements returned by the item processes.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.