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

02-DECISIONS/0104-a-provision-may-be-answered-by-an-adapter-to-the-predecessor.md

@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-22
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md
+---
+
+# 104. A provision may be answered by an adapter to the predecessor
+
+## Context
+
+[Issue 093](../04-ISSUES/093-the-successor-proxy-cannot-serve-what-the-predecessor-still-serves/00-report.md),
+found on the first adopted node hours after it was raised. Every module reachable by name requires
+a **route**. The mesh has one provider of it, its own proxy, which binds the two public ports on
+the machine's own network. The predecessor's proxy holds those ports and serves every public name
+there. So:
+
+- a web module cannot be taken until the mesh's proxy runs;
+- the mesh's proxy cannot run until the predecessor's stops;
+- and when it stops, every name the predecessor served goes dark, because the mesh's proxy serves
+  only what mesh modules have contributed.
+
+Adoption ([ADR 0100](0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md)) keeps a *file* as it
+was and a *container* as it was. It has nothing for a service whose successor is **different
+software**: nothing shares a name to hold, so there is only replacement, of every name at once.
+
+The certificates decide the rest. The predecessor's proxy holds them and renews them. A successor
+taking over first would have to obtain a certificate for every public name in the same window in
+which it took the ports — with nothing else migrated yet, and the only way back being to start the
+predecessor again.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **The successor proxy serves routes it did not derive**, given as the operator's configuration,
+   each disappearing as the module owning that name contributes its own. Rejected for the
+   migration: it puts the riskiest step first, and it puts configuration the mesh does not own
+   into the one component whose design is that the mesh derives its configuration.
+2. **Take the proxy first and accept the window.** Rejected: every public name at once, before
+   anything else has moved, with certificates to obtain in the same window.
+3. **Make the requirement optional**, so a module can be taken while nothing provides route.
+   Rejected: it is not optional. A module that says it must be reachable and is not is a module
+   reporting success while serving nobody.
+4. **An adapter module provides the provision by writing into the predecessor's service.** Adopted.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A provision whose only provider owns a scarce machine-wide resource may be answered, during a
+migration, by an adapter module that writes into the predecessor's own configuration.**
+
+For the route: a module that **provides `route`**, receives every contribution as the proxy does,
+and writes each one as a route file where the predecessor's proxy reads its configuration —
+pointing at the machine port the contributing module now publishes. The predecessor's proxy keeps
+serving every name it already serves, keeps its certificates and keeps renewing them; a name whose
+module has migrated is served by the same proxy, pointing at the mesh's container instead of the
+predecessor's.
+
+**It is migration scaffolding and says so.** It is assigned only on an adopted node, it writes only
+files it can name as its own, and it is removed when the predecessor's proxy retires — at which
+point the mesh's own proxy takes the ports and already knows every route, because by then every
+name belongs to a module that contributes it.
+
+**This does not make the mesh the predecessor's manager.** The adapter writes route files and
+nothing else, and only because the predecessor's control has been stopped by the operator, which
+ADR 0100 requires before a node is adopted.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- The migration keeps its shape: one service at a time, each reversible on its own. The proxy is
+  the **last** cutover again, not the first.
+- There is no certificate event until the end, and at the end there is one, for a proxy that
+  already has every route from the mesh.
+- The mesh writes into a directory the predecessor owns. That is safe only while the predecessor's
+  control is stopped, and it is why the adapter is refused on a converged node.
+- The adapter is throwaway code with a stated end. Something has to delete it; that something is
+  the operator, and the flip is the moment.
+- A second provision with this shape — a resolver on 53, a mail relay on 25 — now has a pattern to
+  follow rather than a new argument to have.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+Unit tests hold the adapter to writing one route file per contribution, naming each file as its
+own, removing a file when its contribution goes, and leaving every file it did not write. The
+controller is held to resolving `route` from it exactly as from the proxy. The adoption lab bed
+gains a step: with the predecessor's proxy serving a name, a module taken behind the adapter is
+reachable under that name, and the predecessor's own names keep answering. Assigning the adapter
+to a converged node is refused.
+
+## References
+
+- [Issue 093](../04-ISSUES/093-the-successor-proxy-cannot-serve-what-the-predecessor-still-serves/00-report.md)
+- [ADR 0100](0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md), [ADR 0007](0007-connectivity.md)

02-DECISIONS/README.md

@@ -92,6 +92,7 @@ python3 00-META/checks/index.py            fail if stale
 - **0101** — [A machine's own resolver does not make it in use](0101-a-machines-own-resolver-does-not-make-it-in-use.md)
 - **0102** — [The mesh writes into a shared file, never over it](0102-the-mesh-writes-into-a-shared-file-never-over-it.md)
 - **0103** — [What an adopted node holds, and what its guard refuses](0103-what-an-adopted-node-holds-and-what-its-guard-refuses.md)
+- **0104** — [A provision may be answered by an adapter to the predecessor](0104-a-provision-may-be-answered-by-an-adapter-to-the-predecessor.md)
 
 ### Its tiers, from the bottom up
 

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/08-connectivity.md

@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ code:
   - mesh-host internal/apply (the service that reflects a rule set)
 updated: 2026-09-22
 decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0104-a-provision-may-be-answered-by-an-adapter-to-the-predecessor.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0103-what-an-adopted-node-holds-and-what-its-guard-refuses.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0099-a-step-that-runs-once-names-what-it-reads.md
@@ -535,6 +536,19 @@ undeclared one does not — then the module is removed and the port closes with
 rule. *A rule set that is written but never loaded passes every check that reads the file, which
 is why the check reads packets.*
 
+### While a predecessor still serves the same thing
+
+*2026-09-22, [ADR 0104](../../02-DECISIONS/0104-a-provision-may-be-answered-by-an-adapter-to-the-predecessor.md).*
+The mesh's proxy owns the two public ports and derives its routes from what modules contributed, so
+it cannot stand beside a predecessor's proxy and cannot serve the predecessor's names. During a
+migration a provision of this shape — one provider, a scarce machine-wide resource — may instead be
+answered by an **adapter**: a module that provides `route` and writes each contribution into the
+predecessor's own configuration, pointing at the machine port the contributing module publishes.
+The predecessor's proxy goes on serving every name and renewing every certificate; the mesh's proxy
+is taken last, when every route is one the mesh contributed. The adapter is refused on a converged
+node, and removed when the predecessor's proxy retires. *How it is checked:* the adoption bed takes
+a module behind the adapter and asserts the name answers and the predecessor's own names still do.
+
 ### On an adopted node
 
 *2026-09-22, [ADR 0100](../../02-DECISIONS/0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md).* **The firewall found on the machine stays in force**, and the mesh

04-ISSUES/093-the-successor-proxy-cannot-serve-what-the-predecessor-still-serves/00-report.md

@@ -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.