ADR 0104: a provision may be answered by an adapter to the predecessor; issue 093 located; connectivity says how the proxy hands over

2026-09-22 23:57:38 +02:00
parent a2323ade2e
commit a23ede495e
4 changed files with 119 additions and 2 deletions
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: located
 opened: 2026-09-22
-located-in: []
+located-in: [mesh-catalog, mesh-controller internal/catalogue]
 fixed-by:
 amended-design:
 ---
@@ -62,3 +62,12 @@ It has to be first, because everything reachable by name waits on it.
  otherwise ask a public authority for every name at the moment of the cutover.
 - Is there a general rule here for "a requirement whose only provider owns a scarce port", or is
  each such provision its own decision?
+
+## Decided
+
+*2026-09-22.* [ADR 0104](../../02-DECISIONS/0104-a-provision-may-be-answered-by-an-adapter-to-the-predecessor.md):
+during a migration, a provision whose only provider owns a scarce machine-wide resource may be
+answered by an **adapter** that writes into the predecessor's own configuration. For the route,
+the predecessor's proxy keeps serving every name and keeps its certificates, while each migrated
+module's name is pointed at the mesh's container. The proxy is the last cutover again, and by then
+every route is one the mesh contributed.