Group 6 closed: 086, 090, 098, 099, 100, 101 resolved on the operator's decision, each saying the live row was not run

04-ISSUES/086-taking-a-module-narrows-a-port-without-saying-so/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: located
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-22
 located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
-fixed-by:
+fixed-by: mesh-controller 201 (the preview names the narrowing and the port's reach), 206 (`take --yes <digest>` acts on the preview read)
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -46,3 +46,7 @@ host first, then the controller's `take`.
 mesh-controller 201 and the pull request after it: the preview names it, and `take --yes <digest>`
 acts on the preview that was read. Stays located until a take is read on an adopted machine — every
 machine of this mesh is converged today, so the record's live row has not been run.
+
+## Resolved, 2026-10-02
+
+Closed on the operator's decision of 2026-10-02 with the built and tested code live on every machine (mesh-controller 206, mesh-host 64), not on a take read on an adopted machine: every machine of this mesh is converged, so none holds a found thing to compare, and the record's live row — ADR 0163's last — will be read at the next real adoption rather than staged. Said here so nobody later believes that row was run.

04-ISSUES/090-the-forge-module-does-not-take-over-the-forge-genesis-raised/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: located
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-22
 located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
-fixed-by:
+fixed-by: mesh-host 64 (genesis raises the forge as `gitea`, on the module's image digest, with the module's data directory at /data; a test holds the installer to the module's manifest)
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -63,3 +63,7 @@ to the module's manifest where the catalogue is checked out beside it. The netwo
 left: the bootstrap forge runs on the machine's network to reach the store on its loopback, the module
 runs bridged and publishes its ports, and the take says so. Closing waits for group 9's genesis test —
 a mesh raised, the module assigned, and the module found holding rather than raising a second forge.
+
+## Resolved, 2026-10-02
+
+Closed on the operator's decision of 2026-10-02. Name, image and data directory align; the network does not — the bootstrap forge runs on the machine's network to reach the store on its loopback, the module runs bridged — and a take says so rather than hides it. Whether genesis should move the forge onto a bridge, and the test that raises a mesh and finds the module holding rather than raising a second forge, belong to group 9's genesis work and are not owed by this record any more.

04-ISSUES/098-taking-a-module-replaces-a-configuration-nobody-compared/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: located
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-23
 located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
-fixed-by:
+fixed-by: mesh-host 63 (the kept original's difference), mesh-controller 201 (shown; a differing file refuses unless `--replace <path>`)
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -74,3 +74,7 @@ host first, then the controller's `take`.
 mesh-host 63 reports the difference between the kept original and the declared content; mesh-controller
 201 shows it in the preview and refuses a differing file unless `--replace <path>` names it, or the
 module declares the file partially. Stays located until a take is read on an adopted machine.
+
+## Resolved, 2026-10-02
+
+Closed on the operator's decision of 2026-10-02 with the built and tested code live on every machine (mesh-controller 206, mesh-host 64), not on a take read on an adopted machine: every machine of this mesh is converged, so none holds a found thing to compare, and the record's live row — ADR 0163's last — will be read at the next real adoption rather than staged. Said here so nobody later believes that row was run.

04-ISSUES/099-a-modules-image-pin-ages-into-a-downgrade/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: located
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-23
 located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
-fixed-by:
+fixed-by: mesh-host 63 (both images' creation dates), mesh-controller 201 (DOWNGRADE said; refused unless `--downgrade`)
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -71,3 +71,7 @@ host first, then the controller's `take`.
 mesh-host 63 reports the found image and both images' creation dates; mesh-controller 201 says
 DOWNGRADE and refuses unless `--downgrade` is said. Stays located until a take is read on an adopted
 machine.
+
+## Resolved, 2026-10-02
+
+Closed on the operator's decision of 2026-10-02 with the built and tested code live on every machine (mesh-controller 206, mesh-host 64), not on a take read on an adopted machine: every machine of this mesh is converged, so none holds a found thing to compare, and the record's live row — ADR 0163's last — will be read at the next real adoption rather than staged. Said here so nobody later believes that row was run.

04-ISSUES/100-a-minted-secret-cannot-be-the-one-the-service-already-uses/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: located
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-23
 located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
-fixed-by:
+fixed-by: mesh-controller 201 (`secret accept --provider` reaches a required secret), 206 (a module's secrets listed with origin; a minted one for found data refuses unless `--mint <name>`)
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -78,3 +78,7 @@ The pull request after it reads every secret a module holds on a machine with it
 of a module whose data was found refuses a minted, unaccepted one — naming the accept that carries
 the existing value in, or `--mint <name>` to let the service take the new one. Stays located until
 a take is read on an adopted machine.
+
+## Resolved, 2026-10-02
+
+Closed on the operator's decision of 2026-10-02 with the built and tested code live on every machine (mesh-controller 206, mesh-host 64), not on a take read on an adopted machine: every machine of this mesh is converged, so none holds a found thing to compare, and the record's live row — ADR 0163's last — will be read at the next real adoption rather than staged. Said here so nobody later believes that row was run.

04-ISSUES/101-taking-a-service-reached-by-container-name-cuts-its-neighbours-off/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: located
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-23
 located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
-fixed-by:
+fixed-by: mesh-controller 201 (the neighbours on a found network are named), 206 (the per-machine `networks` setting), mesh-host 64 (the taken container joins the kept network)
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -73,3 +73,7 @@ The preview names every neighbour on a found network (mesh-controller 201). The
 adds the per-machine setting `networks` — a container id to the found networks it keeps — judged for an
 adopted machine only, and mesh-host 64 has the taken container join each once it runs. Stays located
 until a take is read on an adopted machine.
+
+## Resolved, 2026-10-02
+
+Closed on the operator's decision of 2026-10-02 with the built and tested code live on every machine (mesh-controller 206, mesh-host 64), not on a take read on an adopted machine: every machine of this mesh is converged, so none holds a found thing to compare, and the record's live row — ADR 0163's last — will be read at the next real adoption rather than staged. Said here so nobody later believes that row was run.

04-ISSUES/194-the-hosts-own-former-archive-stops-every-apply/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: located
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-10-02
 located-in: [mesh-host internal/apply (removeOrphan: a former target of a kind with no removal was fatal), mesh-host internal/store (Record keeps a former target for every kind, the host's own archive included)]
-fixed-by:
+fixed-by: mesh-host 65 — a former target of a kind the host cannot remove is left in place, said and forgotten; a dropped archive still refuses
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -62,3 +62,10 @@ because the alternative was four machines that could apply nothing.
 - Is there a bed that replaces a host under the current rules before the live mesh does
   (the proof row of [ADR 0141](../../02-DECISIONS/0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md) was
   a single crossover, before former targets existed)?
+
+## Resolved, 2026-10-02
+
+mesh-host 65, merged 07:35Z. Recovered as the record above says: the operator dropped the one
+`@former:` entry from each machine's host record and pushed; the fixed host then ran on all four and
+its first apply said `forgotten mesh-host.next@former:… a former target left in place` and applied the
+rest. The open questions stand as questions for the host's own versions, not as faults.

04-ISSUES/196-the-hub-relays-only-the-ports-it-publishes-itself/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: located
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-10-02
 located-in: [mesh-controller internal/catalogue/filtering.go (AsNftables: the forward chain has no rule for the mesh passing through, so a relayed packet is judged by this machine's own published ports)]
-fixed-by:
+fixed-by: mesh-controller PR 209 (the forward chain relays what comes in and goes out on the tunnel), live 2026-10-02
 amended-design: []
 ---
 
@@ -45,3 +45,10 @@ same day, and that explanation fit well enough that the per-port pattern was not
   mesh? That would duplicate the target's rules on the hub.
 - No test raises two machines behind a hub and checks a port between them that the hub does not
   publish. The lab's beds have one machine per site.
+
+## Resolved (2026-10-02)
+
+Live on all four machines after one push each. The same sweep, from both home machines to the third
+over the mesh: 45 of 55 ports answer, the same 45 the hub reaches directly. The 9 that do not are
+ports the target opens to nobody on the mesh, and one is refused because it listens only on a LAN
+address. Nothing answers that the target's rules do not open.