Issue 188: what the live fault was and how it was resolved
This commit is contained in:
@@ -43,6 +43,11 @@ where it happens and discovered where it hurts.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
## Resolved in the live mesh, 2026-10-01
|
## Resolved in the live mesh, 2026-10-01
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
By hand: `pin novox acme-ca novox step-ca`, the provider the previous controller had in fact bound
|
The refusal itself was a fault of mesh-controller 195, already corrected on main by its author's
|
||||||
the proxy to (read from its plan), after which the control node resolved, every seat read as held
|
hotfix (196) when the control node was found refusing; the running controller was the one build in
|
||||||
and the roll-out proceeded. The design fault above stands.
|
between. Found by running the previous image and main's image as one-shots beside the running one
|
||||||
|
and reading which resolved. Resolved by pushing the control node from a one-shot of main's image, as
|
||||||
|
the recipe for a controller that cannot roll itself says. A pin naming the proxy's issuer
|
||||||
|
(`step-ca`, the one the previous plan had bound) was made first and kept; it changes nothing. The
|
||||||
|
design fault above stands and is fixed by mesh-controller PR `fix/a-machine-not-on-the-network-is-said`:
|
||||||
|
the dropped machine and the resolver's words are said where the drop happens.
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user