ADR 0163 built: the take digest, the minted-secret refusal, the networks setting, settings judged where stored, genesis raising the forge as declared; issues 096, 097, 126 resolved

The record gets its built note; designs 05 and 09 the revisions; 086, 098,
099, 100 and 101 stay located because every machine is converged and the
record's live row — a take read on an adopted machine — has not been run;
090 is built in part, its network difference left for the take to say.

00-META/checks/README.md

@@ -54,4 +54,6 @@ whose failure has never been observed is a guess about its own correctness.
 The development cycle, checked ([ADR 0080](../../02-DECISIONS/0080-the-development-cycle-is-checked.md)):
 a to-be design names a decision, an in-progress/implemented design names its owning code, a
 located/fixed issue names its owner, a fixed/resolved issue says what fixed it, a graduated
-research overview says what it became. `python3 00-META/checks/cycle.py`
+research overview says what it became, and no two issue records share a number (issue 155 — the
+number is how a record is cited, and `main` lags every open pull request, so two people reading it
+allocate the same one). `python3 00-META/checks/cycle.py`

00-META/checks/cycle.py

@@ -14,7 +14,8 @@ What is enforced:
           its owning code (`code:`) -- no development without a design that says where.
   issues  a known `status:`; once `located`, `located-in:` names the owner;
           once `resolved`, `fixed-by:` says what fixed it (prose counts --
-          "nothing, the capability existed" is an answer).
+          "nothing, the capability existed" is an answer). And no two records share a
+          number -- the number is how a record is cited.
   research a known `status:`; a `graduated` overview says what it `became:`, and every
           target it names exists.
   decisions every accepted record is REACHABLE from the cycle: cited by a design doc's
@@ -109,6 +110,27 @@ def main():
                               "without a design that says where" % status)
 
     # ---- issues ------------------------------------------------------------------------
+    # Two records may not share a number. Numbers are taken as "next free after main", and work
+    # sits on unmerged branches for days -- so two people reading the same main allocate the same
+    # number, and nothing said so. It happened twice in one evening between two machines, and the
+    # second collision landed on main with all three checks passing (issue 155). An issue number is
+    # how every other record cites this one; two records answering to it means a pointer that
+    # resolves to whichever the reader happened to open.
+    seen = {}
+    for folder in sorted(glob.glob(os.path.join(ROOT, "04-ISSUES", "*", ""))):
+        name = os.path.basename(os.path.normpath(folder))
+        number = name.split("-", 1)[0]
+        if not number.isdigit():
+            continue
+        if number in seen:
+            bad(os.path.join("04-ISSUES", name),
+                "is numbered %s, and so is %s -- an issue number is how it is cited, and two "
+                "records answering to one means a citation that resolves to whichever the reader "
+                "opened. Take the next free number across main AND every open pull request"
+                % (number, seen[number]))
+        else:
+            seen[number] = name
+
     for path in sorted(glob.glob(os.path.join(ROOT, "04-ISSUES", "*", "00-report.md"))):
         front = frontmatter(path)
         if front is None:

00-META/checks/records.py

@@ -164,6 +164,12 @@ def check_rests_on(failures, records):
                 # decision is exactly what as-is is for."
                 if rel(path).startswith("03-DESIGN/00-as-is/"):
                     continue
+                # A withdrawn record's citations are history. It instructs nobody -- every reader
+                # is sent to its superseder -- so what it was built on may itself be withdrawn.
+                # Refusing that would mean rewriting the lineage of a record whose reasoning is
+                # the thing the immutability rule protects.
+                if frontmatter(read(path)).get("status") == "superseded":
+                    continue
                 # An extension that supersedes legitimately names what it replaced.
                 this = ADR_FILE.match(os.path.basename(path))
                 supersedes = records[number]["front"].get("superseded-by", "")
@@ -241,13 +247,20 @@ def check_supersession_symmetry(failures, records):
             failures.add("supersession", rel(record["path"]), f"superseder does not exist: {by}")
             continue
         other = records[match.group(1)]
-        claims = os.path.basename(str(other["front"].get("supersedes", "")))
-        if claims != record["name"]:
+        # `supersedes:` may name one record or several. One decision replacing two is a real
+        # situation -- two records that built and refined the same wrong mechanism are withdrawn
+        # by the one record that removes it -- and a check that allows only one would force
+        # either a chain of pro-forma records or an unmarked supersession.
+        claimed = other["front"].get("supersedes", "")
+        if isinstance(claimed, str):
+            claimed = [claimed] if claimed else []
+        claims = [os.path.basename(str(entry)) for entry in claimed]
+        if record["name"] not in claims:
             failures.add(
                 "supersession",
                 rel(other["path"]),
                 f"ADR {number} says this supersedes it; this record does not say so "
-                f"(supersedes: {claims or 'absent'})",
+                f"(supersedes: {', '.join(claims) or 'absent'})",
             )
 
 

00-META/glossary.md

@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ another — and a mesh you cannot name precisely is a mesh two people describe d
 - **the deprecated broker** — the lavinmq module. It was the mesh's bus and is not any more. It
   keeps running as an **ordinary provider** of the `amqp` provision, for modules that need a
   message broker of their own the way something needs a database
-  ([ADR 0127](../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md)) — no seat, not foundation,
+  ([ADR 0127](../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseded by [ADR 0131](../02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md))) — no seat, not foundation,
   never raised at genesis, and a mesh that never installs it is complete.
 
   Say *the deprecated broker*, not "the compatibility broker" (it serves the mesh's own modules,
@@ -52,8 +52,11 @@ another — and a mesh you cannot name precisely is a mesh two people describe d
 
 - **package** — what code resolves when it is **compiled**: an npm/cargo/pypi dependency, by
   **version**. Served by the **package-registry** (gitea). Only a builder talks to it.
-- **artifact** — what the mesh delivers to a machine to **install and run**: an OCI image, by
-  **digest**. Served by the **artifact-store** (distribution). Every node pulls from it.
+- **artifact** — anything a build produces and the mesh delivers to a machine by **digest**: an
+  `image`, a mirrored `upstream` image, a `bundle` of the module's own code, an `archive`. Served by
+  the **artifact-store**, an OCI registry that holds every kind as content-addressed blobs
+  ([ADR 0156](../02-DECISIONS/0156-an-artifact-is-what-a-build-produces-and-the-store-is-named-for-its-scope.md)).
+  Every node pulls from it. An image is one kind of artifact, and a module is not an image.
 - These are two protocols, not one store being weak — see [ADR 0075](../02-DECISIONS/0075-two-stores-and-which-provides-what.md).
 
 ## How modules relate to the mesh
@@ -75,6 +78,18 @@ another — and a mesh you cannot name precisely is a mesh two people describe d
   is a role you occupy, and the two meet where a seat delivers a provision: occupying the seat is
   what makes a module *the* provider of it.
 
+## The surfaces
+
+- **console** — the module (`mesh-console`) that puts the mesh's tools in front of whoever is on a
+  machine: an MCP endpoint on the machine's loopback for an agent, the same endpoint for a person. It
+  is assigned like any module, holds a credential the mesh minted, and calls tools under a grant its
+  manifest declares (`invokes`). Loopback is the authority boundary: whoever is on the machine owns the
+  mesh there ([ADR 0152](../02-DECISIONS/0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md)).
+  Not "the tool bridge", "the brain" or "the MCP server" — those name the predecessor's program or a
+  protocol, and the console is a module.
+- **invokes** — the manifest word for the tools a module calls, `<module>.<tool>` each or `*` for
+  every one. A grant on the publish side and nothing else; a module that declares none calls nothing.
+
 ## How this page is kept
 
 A new name for an existing thing lands here first, in the same change that introduces it in code. A

00-META/process/03-issues.md

@@ -21,7 +21,12 @@ incident someone must **clear**.
 
 ## Steps
 
-1. Take the next free number. Create `04-ISSUES/NNN-short-name/00-report.md`:
+1. Take the next free number — **across `main` and every open pull request**, not `main` alone.
+   Work sits on unmerged branches for days, so two people both reading `main` allocate the same
+   number; it happened twice in one hour between two machines, and the second collision reached
+   `main` with every check passing (issue 155). `cycle.py` now refuses two records sharing a number,
+   which catches a collision but does not prevent one. Create
+   `04-ISSUES/NNN-short-name/00-report.md`:
 
    ```yaml
    ---
@@ -42,6 +47,14 @@ incident someone must **clear**.
 ## Rules
 
 - Closed issues are never deleted — they are the mesh's symptom-to-component memory.
+- `fixed-by:` names something that will still exist: a commit or a pull request, never a branch. A
+  branch is deleted when it merges, so a branch name there is a pointer that resolves to nothing by
+  the time anybody follows it.
+- A fix that turns out to have broken something else is written back into the record that asked for
+  it, pointing at the new issue. Somebody arriving at a record to learn why the code is the way it
+  is must not have to already know there was a sequel.
+- Renumbering a collision happens once, in the branch that lands last. Renumbering a branch whose
+  author is still pushing only moves the race.
 - An issue whose answer is a general lesson should also be written to the knowledge base, so
   the next person searching a symptom finds it. Both, not either.
 - `status: wontfix` is legitimate and requires a sentence saying why.

02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md

@@ -13,6 +13,14 @@ decisions taken over three days; the reasoning is kept, the fragmentation is not
 
 The environment a change is run against before it reaches real machines.
 
+> **Still the lab, no longer the test bed — 2026-09-30, by [ADR 0149](0149-the-live-mesh-is-the-test-bed.md).**
+> Everything here stands. What changed is what the lab is *for*: a change is verified against the mesh
+> that is running, because the faults that cost the most are faults of a mesh that already exists —
+> bound consumers, containers made against an older roster, an adopted machine — and a bed is by
+> construction a mesh that does not. Raising a mesh from bare is now the lab's whole job, which is the
+> one thing the live mesh cannot be asked to do. 0149 also supersedes
+> [ADR 0068](0068-the-lab-takes-requests.md), which extended this one and was never built.
+
 ## A node in the lab is a virtual machine
 
 It boots a stock Linux image, runs the real install, and becomes a node. **It is not a model of

02-DECISIONS/0025-the-design-record-is-read-not-copied.md

@@ -72,6 +72,12 @@ answers from it. Nothing flows back: this repository is public, the mesh is not,
 would be how installation-specific detail arrives into documents that must not carry it
 ([`README.md`](../README.md)).
 
+> **The mechanism changed — 2026-09-30, by ADR 0153.** What stands: read where it is written, no copy,
+> one-way. What moved: the reader is a module the mesh assigns (`records`, a checkout at a commit every
+> answer names) rather than the agent session of design 15, which is not built; and "the search consults
+> the agent" has no store to consult since the cut-over — the console's tool list is where the record
+> appears beside everything else. [ADR 0153](0153-the-record-is-read-by-a-module-and-the-console-lists-it.md).
+
 ## Consequences
 
 **This repository stops being a fourth knowledge system, properly.** The original objection was

02-DECISIONS/0037-where-a-module-lives.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 topic: building it
-status: proposed
+status: accepted
 date: 2026-09-01
 deciders: jochen
 reconstructed: false
@@ -101,3 +101,19 @@ the digest down after building.
 **Whether kind 4 deserves a module at all.** Thirty-five descriptions that say *install this and
 write these files* may be better as one module with settings than as thirty-five modules. Left
 open deliberately; it is a question about the shape of the catalogue, not about whether to have one.
+
+## Accepted, 2026-09-29, against what was built
+
+*Marked in a grooming pass: the mesh was built to this record and the record still said `proposed`.*
+
+The proposal is the arrangement that exists. `mesh-catalog` holds descriptions of software we did
+not write and the programs that provision it, and holds neither the mesh's own components nor an
+application's own module. The mesh's list of modules is a table in the control plane, filled by
+`module add`, and every module records the source it came from with the commit it was read at.
+
+**One half is not built: `module check` as a command on the control plane's binary.** A manifest is
+still validated by a test that reaches into the control plane's internals — which works for this
+catalogue and gives nothing at all to somebody describing their own application in their own
+repository, which this record says is the case that matters most. That is
+[issue 148](../04-ISSUES/148-a-manifest-outside-this-catalogue-has-no-check/00-report.md).
+

02-DECISIONS/0047-a-module-runs-its-code-as-its-own-process-with-its-own-account.md

@@ -26,6 +26,14 @@ runtime is per-module, not per-node, and treating the audit-logger as special le
 modules' code with nothing to run it: the conversion produced tools and events that, as it stands,
 never execute.
 
+> **The hosting form is settled elsewhere — 2026-09-30.** Where this record says "a container", read
+> [ADR 0150](0150-a-modules-own-code-runs-as-supervised-processes-under-one-account.md): a module's own
+> code runs as supervised processes under this record's one account. Nothing else here changes — the
+> per-module runtime, the per-tool key and the single scoped account are the argument this record made
+> and they are why 0150 goes the way it does. The note is here because two design documents chose the
+> other form without knowing this record existed
+> ([issue 117](../04-ISSUES/117-a-modules-own-code-is-a-container-and-a-process/00-report.md)).
+
 ## Decision
 
 ### A module with tools or events runs a process of its own

02-DECISIONS/0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md

@@ -80,6 +80,15 @@ reaching the routed name, which the clause above has just made resolvable inside
 three are one decision: **compose the name, propagate it, certify it** — each is meaningless without
 the one before it.
 
+> **The mechanism changed — 2026-09-30, by [ADR 0148](0148-the-meshs-names-are-resolved-not-copied-into-containers.md).**
+> A routed name still reaches every asker in the mesh, which is what this record decided and it stands.
+> It no longer reaches them by being written into each declared container: copying the roster in made the
+> roster part of every container's identity, so one name moving replaced every container in the mesh
+> ([issue 151](../04-ISSUES/151-a-new-name-recreates-every-container-in-the-mesh/00-report.md)). A
+> container resolves through its machine's resolver instead. The consequence below — that an internal
+> issuer's challenge needs the routed name resolvable inside the mesh — holds unchanged, by the means the
+> machine itself already uses.
+
 ## Consequences
 
 - **Lab-versus-production is one node-level `public-domain` setting**, not an override on every

02-DECISIONS/0068-the-lab-takes-requests.md

@@ -1,14 +1,21 @@
 ---
 topic: building it
-status: proposed
+status: superseded
 date: 2026-09-12
 deciders: jochen
 reconstructed: false
 extends: 0016-the-lab.md
+superseded-by: 02-DECISIONS/0149-the-live-mesh-is-the-test-bed.md
 ---
 
 # 68. The lab takes requests, one at a time, and runs each from its own copy
 
+> **Superseded — 2026-09-30, by [ADR 0149](0149-the-live-mesh-is-the-test-bed.md).** Never built. The
+> live mesh became the test bed, because the faults that cost the most are faults of a mesh that
+> already exists — bound consumers, containers made against an older roster, an adopted machine — and a
+> bed is by construction a mesh that does not. The rule worth keeping from below is that a run reads a
+> copy that is not anybody's working tree.
+
 ## Context
 
 **The lab is exclusive hardware, and today a person holds it.** Raising a scenario takes over

02-DECISIONS/0080-the-development-cycle-is-checked.md

@@ -35,6 +35,16 @@ The development cycle is enforced mechanically, to the extent frontmatter can ca
   capability existed" is an answer).
 - **No silent graduation** — a `graduated` research overview says what it `became:`, and the
   targets exist.
+- **No two records answering to one number** — added 2026-09-30; see the insight below.
+
+> **Progressive insight — 2026-09-30.** The list above named four things `cycle.py` enforces, and
+> now names five. Nothing enforced that two issue records hold different numbers: two machines
+> filing issues within one hour both read `main`, both took "the next free number", and collided
+> twice — the second collision reaching `main` with `records.py`, `cycle.py` and `index.py` all
+> reporting success (04-ISSUES/155). A number is how every other record cites one, so two records
+> answering to it is a citation that resolves to whichever folder the reader opened. `cycle.py`
+> refuses it now. The decision here stands exactly as written: this is one more thing frontmatter
+> and file names can carry, found by its absence rather than by reasoning.
 
 [`00-META/checks/cycle.py`](../00-META/checks/cycle.py) refuses violations, beside `records.py`
 and `index.py`; all three run before any merge here. What frontmatter cannot see — that code work

02-DECISIONS/0084-which-provider-serves-a-consumer.md

@@ -106,3 +106,14 @@ is refused with the candidates named, never resolved by picking.
   gap, and the day-one evidence.
 - [`03-DESIGN/01-to-be/23-choosing-a-provider.md`](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/23-choosing-a-provider.md)
   — the design.
+
+> **Widened, 2026-10-01 (issue #258).** The pin named a node, on the reasoning that "the same
+> module on two machines is two answers, and which machine is the whole question". Half right:
+> two modules on one machine can both answer a provision — `public-acme` and `step-ca` both offer
+> `acme-ca` on novox — and then which *module* is the whole question, and a node alone cannot ask
+> it. A provider is a (node, module) pair ([design 23](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/23-choosing-a-provider.md)),
+> and a pin now names the pair: `pin <node> <provision> <from-node> <module>`. The resolver
+> refuses a node that answers twice instead of taking the last one listed, and refuses two
+> providers beside the consumer instead of settling them by a map walk — the same stance design 23
+> takes: ambiguity is refused, never resolved by picking. Records made before are completed by
+> migration where the node they name answers once. mesh-controller: `feat/pin-names-the-provider`.

02-DECISIONS/0095-the-control-plane-is-the-way-to-ask-a-module.md

@@ -47,6 +47,14 @@ Anything with the control plane in reach can ask any module anything it serves.
 harder: nothing outside the control plane can, and the control plane's connection is one more
 thing on the path of every question — a cost accepted for the audit it buys.
 
+> **The mechanism changed — 2026-09-30, by ADR 0152.** What stands: `ask` on the control plane, and
+> that every call passes an account whose permission list says what it may ask. What moved: "nothing
+> outside the control plane can" stopped being true when a person's account gained a publish grant per
+> tool (design 25 §7, 2026-09-28), and [ADR 0152](0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md)
+> takes the first option above for a module as well — a manifest declares `invokes`, and the bus grants
+> exactly that publish side. The audit the second option bought is the bus's permission list, which
+> derives both.
+
 ## How it is checked
 
 A tools-only bed asks a served tool through the control plane and asserts an answer arrived —

02-DECISIONS/0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 topic: what runs on it
-status: proposed
+status: accepted
 date: 2026-09-25
 deciders: jochen
 reconstructed: false

02-DECISIONS/0113-the-vault-makes-every-secret.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 topic: what runs on it
-status: proposed
+status: accepted
 date: 2026-09-25
 deciders: jochen
 reconstructed: false
@@ -275,3 +275,11 @@ On acceptance, each of these is superseded or amended by this record, not edited
   everything a module needs is a requirement
 - [Issue 095](../04-ISSUES/095-a-module-assigned-after-genesis-has-no-broker-account/00-report.md),
   [issue 103](../04-ISSUES/103-a-container-is-not-recreated-when-a-file-it-reads-changes/00-report.md): what fails today
+
+## Accepted, 2026-09-29, against what was built
+
+*Marked in a grooming pass.* The vault is a module providing `secret` at mesh scope, and six
+modules in the catalogue require it — so a shared secret is a requirement answered by the vault,
+which is what this record asks for. Private keys are still made where they are used and never
+travel, which is the other half and was never in question.
+

02-DECISIONS/0114-a-shared-credential-rotates-over-two-credentials.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 topic: what runs on it
-status: proposed
+status: accepted
 date: 2026-09-26
 deciders: jochen
 reconstructed: false
@@ -163,6 +163,14 @@ value, the requirement is marked not rotatable by the mesh, and a rotation is re
 **The number of parties decides, never the provider.** The resolver knows it from the requirement's
 recipients, leaving out the vault's custody copy, so no definition declares it.
 
+> **Progressive insight — 2026-10-01.** The number of parties is the resolver's to know; *which form*
+> a single party's credential takes is not, and cannot be: whether a module reads its secret when it
+> starts or applies it once to a backend is a fact about the software, visible nowhere in the graph.
+> So the definition declares that half — `taken: at-start` or `taken: applied` on an own secret — and
+> a secret that declares neither is not rotated, refused with the word to write (issue 180). The
+> read-at-start form is built; the staged form for an applied credential is not. The decision stands;
+> the sentence above was one fact short.
+
 ### Until an adapter can
 
 **An adapter that cannot yet ensure a second credential says so.** The two-party credentials it applies
@@ -189,6 +197,23 @@ On acceptance, each of these is amended by this record, not edited:
   credential is no longer all-or-nothing with a window. It overlaps, with each step confirmed.
   A single-party credential is staged, not replaced.
 
+## Accepted, 2026-09-30, and not scheduled
+
+Accepted as written. The separation it draws — a consumer's *resource* and a *credential that reaches
+it* are different things with different lifecycles — is the part that had to be settled, because the
+alternative is what the record was written against: retiring a credential taking the data it reached
+with it. That is a data-loss shape, and a record that names it should not sit unresolved while the
+code that could hit it is being written.
+
+**It is not built, and accepting it does not schedule it.** The SDK's provisioner adapter is still
+`create` / `remove` / `holds` rather than the four operations above, and no provider implements the
+two-credential rotation. Accepted-and-not-built is an ordinary state here — 0141 and 0142 are both in
+it — and it is the honest one: leaving this `proposed` made it invisible to anyone reading what the
+mesh has decided, while changing nothing about what runs.
+
+The work it implies belongs with the provisioner contract, beside
+[issue 124](../04-ISSUES/124-a-consumer-cannot-be-told-what-its-provider-derived/00-report.md).
+
 ## Consequences
 
 - **Every credential provider's adapter changes**, in two steps. The first separates *retire a

02-DECISIONS/0115-one-assignment-of-a-module-per-node.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 topic: what runs on it
-status: proposed
+status: accepted
 date: 2026-09-26
 deciders: jochen
 extends: 0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md
@@ -47,3 +47,10 @@ other boundary already is: the module name.
   node runs one of each (ADR 0115)" — instead of failing on whichever name collides first.
 - Multi-tenant asks are answered in the catalogue (a second module definition), not in the
   control plane.
+
+## Accepted, 2026-09-29, against what was built
+
+*Marked in a grooming pass.* The rule is enforced where it cannot be forgotten: `assignment`'s
+primary key is `(node, module)`, so a second assignment of one module to one machine is not a thing
+the mesh can hold. The record read `proposed` while the schema had already settled it.
+

02-DECISIONS/0118-undeclaring-gives-a-unit-back-the-state-it-was-found-in.md

@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ extends: 0102-the-mesh-writes-into-a-shared-file-never-over-it.md
 ## Context
 
 When a resource stops being declared — its module unassigned, the node sent a
-deliberately-empty declaration ([issue 127](../04-ISSUES/127-a-declaration-that-shrinks-to-empty-is-skipped-not-sent/00-report.md)),
+deliberately-empty declaration ([issue 149](../04-ISSUES/149-a-declaration-that-shrinks-to-empty-is-skipped-not-sent/00-report.md)),
 or a new catalogue version renaming its id — the host undoes it. The host's own code states
 the rule it means to follow: **it removes what it made and leaves what it merely configured.**
 For almost every resource it does exactly that:

02-DECISIONS/0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md

@@ -81,7 +81,9 @@ closed set stays what its name says it is: the *system's* roles, not everyone's.
 - **`the-uplink` → `node-uplink`** ([ADR 0125](0117-a-machines-uplink-is-a-seat.md)). Unheld, so it
   renames with no migration.
 - **The registry seats — `the-artifact-store`, `npm-package-registry` (→ `mesh-artifact-store`,
-  `mesh-npm-package-registry`) — and `git` (→ `mesh-git`) — are decided but deferred.** They each
+  `mesh-npm-package-registry`) — and `git` (→ `mesh-git`) — are decided but deferred.** *(The
+  mechanism changed — 2026-09-30, by ADR 0156: `the-artifact-store` is renamed, one update and one
+  alias under ADR 0122; the other two stay deferred.)* They each
   *deliver* a provision, so renaming them is a delivering-seat migration: a holder that stops
   resolving mid-flight takes a provision away from every consumer. That risk is not worth carrying in
   the same pass as the node-* renames, so they keep their names until done deliberately.

02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md

@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 ---
 topic: the mesh
-status: accepted
+status: superseded
+superseded-by: 0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md
 date: 2026-09-26
 deciders: jochen
 reconstructed: false

02-DECISIONS/0128-the-mesh-bus-is-required-not-ambient.md

@@ -4,11 +4,18 @@ status: accepted
 date: 2026-09-26
 deciders: jochen
 reconstructed: false
-extends: 02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md
 ---
 
 # 128. The mesh bus is required, not ambient
 
+
+> **Pointer repointed, 2026-09-27.** This record was written extending
+> [ADR 0127](0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseded by [ADR 0131](0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md)), which
+> [ADR 0131](0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md) has since superseded — AMQP is
+> not a provision at all. Nothing decided here changes; the frontmatter now rests on the live record,
+> and the citations below are read with that in mind.
+
 ## Context
 
 [Design 29](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/32-what-a-module-declares.md) opened by saying the bus is
@@ -72,7 +79,7 @@ process in the path and nothing waiting on a bus account to create bus accounts.
 whose provider is the mesh itself.
 
 **A module may also provide a NATS server of its own, and that is a different interface.** Exactly
-as the AMQP broker provides `amqp` ([ADR 0127](0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md)), a module
+as the AMQP broker provides `amqp` ([ADR 0127](0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseded by [ADR 0131](0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md))), a module
 may run its own NATS and offer it as a backing service. That interface is **`nats`**; the mesh's
 own bus is **`mesh-bus`**; the two are never the same name, because a manifest that said `nats`
 could mean either and the difference is the whole architecture. The rule from 0119 decides which
@@ -109,7 +116,7 @@ is legitimate: a private bus is a backing service, never a channel to another mo
 
 - [ADR 0125](0125-the-bus-is-the-only-broker.md) — superseded by 0119; its bootstrap argument is
   narrowed here to the case it supports.
-- [ADR 0127](0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) — a broker as a backing service; this
+- [ADR 0127](0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseded by [ADR 0131](0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md)) — a broker as a backing service; this
   applies the same shape to the mesh's own bus and separates the two names.
 - [ADR 0043](0043-a-module-broker-account-is-scoped-by-emits-and-consumes.md) — authority from
   declarations, which this leaves untouched.

02-DECISIONS/0130-the-predecessor-is-ending-and-its-broker-goes-with-it.md

@@ -4,14 +4,21 @@ status: accepted
 date: 2026-09-27
 deciders: jochen
 reconstructed: false
-extends: 02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md
 ---
 
 # 130. The predecessor is ending, and its broker goes with it
 
+
+> **Pointer repointed, 2026-09-27.** This record was written extending
+> [ADR 0127](0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseded by [ADR 0131](0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md)), which
+> [ADR 0131](0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md) has since superseded — AMQP is
+> not a provision at all. Nothing decided here changes; the frontmatter now rests on the live record,
+> and the citations below are read with that in mind.
+
 ## Context
 
-[ADR 0127](0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) settled that the old broker is an ordinary
+[ADR 0127](0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseded by [ADR 0131](0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md)) settled that the old broker is an ordinary
 provider of the `amqp` provision rather than a compatibility module with an end date. It rejected
 giving it a retirement condition, and said why: *"its clients are not only the predecessor's, so the
 retirement condition describes a day that will not come."*

02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md

@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-27
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+supersedes: 0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md
+---
+
+# 131. Everything on the mesh speaks to the broker seat, and AMQP is not a provision
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0127](0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) settled the old broker as an ordinary provider
+of an ordinary provision, `amqp`, kept for whatever wanted a message broker of its own. The day the
+bus moved was the day that framing was tested, and it failed in a way that took the control plane
+down for an evening.
+
+Three things came out of the wreckage. **The protocol had leaked into the seat's contract**: for a
+module to hold `mesh-broker`, it had to provide what the seat delivers, and what it delivered was
+`amqp` — so the module that will carry the bus on NATS could not hold the seat that names the bus,
+while the module the mesh was leaving could. **A consumer of `amqp` is not asking for AMQP.** The two
+modules requiring it wanted the mesh's messaging — to emit an event, to hear a topic — and named the
+wire protocol only because that was the word available. **And AMQP and NATS are not interchangeable
+at the wire.** A provision named after a protocol can only ever be answered by that protocol, so once
+the bus is NATS an `amqp` provision has one possible provider, and it is the thing being retired.
+
+The operator's position, stated during the outage: modules depend on the broker *seat*, not on a
+protocol; AMQP is obsolete as anything the mesh's core knows about; a module that depends on `amqp`
+is wrong; and everything should reach the mesh's bus and be able to emit events and consume topics
+through it.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A module that needs messaging uses the mesh's bus, and the mesh's bus is whatever holds
+`mesh-broker`.** Emitting an event and consuming a topic go through the sdk, which is handed the
+bus by the mesh with the module's own credential. No manifest names a wire protocol to get it.
+
+**`amqp` is neither a provision nor a requirement.** Registration refuses a manifest that provides
+it or requires it. The `mesh-broker` seat delivers `mesh-bus`, and its holder is the module that
+provides `mesh-bus` — today the nats module, and only it.
+
+**The old broker's module and the two modules that required it leave the catalogue.** They are
+removed, not converted: one was a proof that a grant worked end to end, the other forwards mail off a
+queue, and both are re-done against the bus if wanted, as new modules under this record.
+
+**The controller's AMQP transport is deleted once every node reports on the new bus**, and the
+switch that selects a transport goes with it — one bus, so nothing to select.
+
+The predecessor's own broker is outside the mesh and not this record's concern
+([ADR 0130](0130-the-predecessor-is-ending-and-its-broker-goes-with-it.md)): what the predecessor's
+tooling loses when it stops is accepted there.
+
+## Options considered
+
+1. **Keep 0127: AMQP stays an ordinary provision with the old broker as its provider.** Rejected. It
+   is what put the protocol into the seat's contract, it is why the seat could be left with no valid
+   holder mid-change, and it keeps two transports in the control plane indefinitely for the benefit of
+   two modules that did not want AMQP in the first place.
+2. **Bridge it: the old broker's module also provides `mesh-bus`, so both can hold the seat during the
+   change.** Rejected. It makes the retiring broker a legitimate mesh bus for exactly as long as
+   nobody removes the line, which in practice is forever, and it leaves `amqp` as a thing the core
+   still knows the name of.
+3. **The seat is the dependency; the protocol is nobody's business but the holder's.** Adopted.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **The change of holder is a handover, and it needs a command.** Nothing today moves a seat from
+  one assignment to another as one act, and a seat the control plane dereferences cannot be empty
+  in between — that emptiness is the outage this record comes from. The command takes a seat and the
+  assignment taking it over. Designed and built before the cutover, under
+  [28 — Building the bus](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/28-building-the-bus.md).
+- **The seat's row moves to `mesh-bus` before the new holder registers, and that is safe.** The
+  control plane composes its own bus address through the seat *by name*
+  (`${seat:mesh-broker:…}`), and the overview derives holders by name; only registration and the
+  provision-to-seat resolution read what a seat delivers. So the row can change under the current
+  holder without unseating it, the new holder can then register its claim, and the handover happens
+  when both are running. Verified in the code during the outage, not assumed.
+- **Registration gains two refusals**: a manifest providing `amqp`, and one requiring it.
+- **The `rollout check` stops saying the old broker stays.** It said so under 0127; it now lists
+  unassigning it as the last step of the move.
+- **What got harder**: a third party that genuinely wants an AMQP broker on a mesh node runs one as
+  any application module, with no provision and no seat, and nothing on the mesh routes to it. That
+  is the cost of the mesh not knowing the word.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| No manifest provides or requires `amqp` | a registration test refusing each, naming this record; and a whole-catalogue test asserting no registered manifest names it |
+| `mesh-broker` delivers `mesh-bus`, and only a `mesh-bus` provider may hold it | the existing registration test for a delivering seat, with the row's value read from the store (mesh-controller#89) |
+| The seat's row can change without unseating the holder | a test composing the control plane's own address and the overview under a row that the current holder does not satisfy |
+| The rollout does not leave the old broker running | `rollout check` output, asserted in its test |
+| The AMQP transport is gone | the package does not compile with it referenced; the switch variable is refused as unknown at start |

02-DECISIONS/0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md

@@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-28
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0129-a-seat-carries-the-protocol-of-its-role.md
+---
+
+# 132. A seat carries the tools its holder must serve
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0129](0129-a-seat-carries-the-protocol-of-its-role.md) gave a seat the protocol of its role in
+three parts: the work it accepts, the events it emits, and the verbs it **serves** — request and
+reply, awaited. The bus already derives authority from all three: a holder subscribes
+`mesh.seat.<seat>.tool.<verb>`, and a module that uses the seat may publish it and nothing else.
+
+**The serving third has never been used.** The mesh defines 14 seats, 8 mesh-scoped and 6
+node-scoped. Exactly one carries a protocol at all — the build machine, which accepts `build` and
+emits `built`. Not one seat declares a single verb it serves. The mechanism is built, enforced, and
+empty.
+
+Meanwhile every tool on the mesh is addressed to a module. Of 72 modules in the catalogue, 45 serve
+tools, about 203 of them, each on `mesh.mod.<module>.tool.<name>`. So a caller binds to the module
+that happens to hold a role rather than to the role, and replacing that module breaks every caller —
+which is the thing seats exist to prevent everywhere else.
+
+**Nothing can say what tools exist.** Measured on 2026-09-28, with the bus carrying the whole mesh: a
+workstation client holding an operator credential connected, the bus accepted the account, and
+`mesh call gitea.gitea_list_repos` answered with real repositories. The same client's `mesh tools`
+found nothing, because it asks `mesh-catalog.catalog_tools` and no module serves that: the catalogue
+serves `catalog_modules`, `catalog_module`, `catalog_provides`, `catalog_dependents` and
+`catalog_stale`. An agent can therefore call any tool it already knows the name of and discover none.
+MCP's `tools/list` is that same question, so the MCP surface is a working transport over an empty
+catalogue.
+
+**And there is nowhere for a tool's definition to live.** A manifest has a `tools` field: 0 of the 45
+modules that serve tools fill it. That is not neglect, it is the arrangement failing — the field was
+the bus grant's source for what a module may subscribe, and because nothing filled it every module
+that served a tool was refused its own subscription on the new bus, live, until the grant was changed
+to the module's own namespace. Today a tool's name, description and argument schema exist only in the
+module's code.
+
+Two facts about the machinery matter for what follows. A seat's protocol is not in the store: the seat
+rows lack the ADR 0129 columns, so the protocol comes from compiled defaults and is merged in when a
+row is read. And `seatSubject` is flat — `mesh.seat.<seat>.<kind>.<verb>` with no node in it — so a
+node-scoped seat's tool call would reach every node's holder at once, and the holders' queue group
+would hand it to whichever answered first.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A seat's protocol carries its tools in full**: the verb, what it does, and the schema of its
+arguments and of its answer. The seat is the definition of the role's interface; the holder is an
+implementation of it.
+
+**Serving the seat's tools is a condition of holding the seat.** A module that does not serve every
+verb the seat declares may not occupy it. This is checked where the other conditions of holding are
+checked — registration and handover — and refused by naming the verbs that are missing.
+
+**A role's tools are addressed to the role.** `mesh.seat.<seat>.tool.<verb>` mesh-wide. A node-scoped
+seat carries the node in the address, because one subject reaching six machines' holders is not an
+address, and the queue group that made it look like one would silently pick a winner.
+
+**A module keeps its own tools, and both exist.** `gitea_list_repos` stays, because gitea can run
+without holding the `git` seat — a second forge, an instance kept for one purpose. The module's name
+answers *this gitea*; the seat's verb answers *whoever is the forge*. Which of the two a caller wants
+is a decision in the running session, not one the mesh makes for it.
+
+**What answers "what tools exist" follows where the definition lives.** A seat's tools are read from
+the mesh's own records. A module's own tools are answered by the module, from the code that defines
+them. Discovery is therefore a read for the durable half and a question to the running mesh for the
+free half.
+
+**A seat's tools are an interface, and change like one.** Additive within a version; a change that
+would break a caller takes the version token the subject already has room for (design 29 §8), and the
+two run side by side until nothing is bound to the old one.
+
+**The mesh's own verbs are the `mesh-controller` seat's tools.** `status`, `push`, `build`, `assign`
+and the rest are a role's interface, not a container's, and the audit point [ADR 0095](0095-the-control-plane-is-the-way-to-ask-a-module.md)
+asks for is the seat's holder.
+
+## Options considered
+
+1. **The manifest declares each module's tools.** Rejected. The list is then written twice — in the
+   manifest and in the code — and a schema in a manifest goes stale silently, which is the worst kind
+   of wrong for something an agent reads to decide what to call. It is also the arrangement that has
+   already failed once: the field exists, 0 of 45 modules fill it, and the grant that depended on it
+   refused every tool subscription on the mesh.
+2. **Every runtime answers an introspection call, and something aggregates them.** Rejected as the
+   shape for a role's tools, kept for a module's own. An aggregator needs permission to publish into
+   every module's namespace, which is a widening the mesh otherwise gives only to the control plane;
+   and the answer is only as available as the modules are, so a mesh whose catalogue cannot say what a
+   role answers while its holder is down cannot plan against it.
+3. **The control plane answers everything.** Rejected. It puts a tool surface on the control plane for
+   tools it does not implement, and makes discovery depend on the one component that must stay
+   answerable while it is itself being replaced. The mesh's own verbs are its to answer, and it answers
+   them as the holder of a seat.
+4. **Seats only; no module tools.** Rejected. Most modules hold no seat, and inventing a seat per
+   module to give its tools a home would dilute what a seat is: one holder of a role the mesh needs
+   exactly one of.
+
+## Consequences
+
+**One capability can have two names, deliberately.** A forge that holds the `git` seat answers both
+`mesh.seat.git.tool.list_repos` and `mesh.mod.gitea.tool.gitea_list_repos`. This is the one place the
+mesh accepts two names for one thing, because they are answers to different questions and the second
+one survives the module not holding the seat. The glossary rule stands everywhere else.
+
+**A seat becomes a contract to implement.** Adding a verb to a seat is a change every holder must
+make, and a claim that was valid becomes invalid until it does. That is the point, and it is also the
+reason a seat's tools should be few and durable while a module's own stay free.
+
+**Three prerequisites, none of them in place.** The seat's protocol must be in the store rather than in
+compiled defaults, or discovery reads a binary rather than the mesh. The protocol must become richer
+than a list of verbs, because a verb without a schema is not something an agent can call. And a
+node-scoped seat needs the node in its subject before any of its tools can exist.
+
+**Discovery becomes cheap for the half that matters.** What roles the mesh has and what each answers is
+a query, with no fan-out and nothing to be up. An agent's authority can then be role-shaped — *the
+forge's tools* — rather than a list of module-specific names that changes when a module is replaced.
+
+**The MCP surface belongs inside the mesh.** Once the tools are the mesh's own records, the thing that
+serves them to an agent is a module the mesh assigns to the machine where the agent sits, with a
+credential the mesh minted and authority derived from what it may call — not a program started by hand
+with a credential printed to a terminal.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+- **Holding is refused without the verbs.** The condition sits with the other conditions of holding a
+  seat, so registration and a handover both refuse a module that does not serve what the seat declares,
+  and the refusal names the missing verbs. A test per condition, as the other seat conditions have.
+- **The grant is derived from the seat, and already is.** A holder's subscription and a user's publish
+  come from the seat's protocol, so a verb nobody declared is a subject nobody may use, and a verb the
+  seat declares reaches exactly its holder. The golden composition of the bus's user list is the test
+  that keeps it honest.
+- **Discovery is a read, and is tested as one.** What the mesh answers for a seat's tools equals what
+  the seat's records declare — no call to a module in the path, so the test needs no running module.
+- **A node-scoped seat's subject carries its node**, checked by the same test that checks the subject
+  table: two nodes holding one node-scoped seat derive two addresses.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0129](0129-a-seat-carries-the-protocol-of-its-role.md) — the protocol this widens
+- [ADR 0121](0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md) — the role, its work and its events
+- [ADR 0095](0095-the-control-plane-is-the-way-to-ask-a-module.md) — a tool call passes one process where an audit belongs
+- [ADR 0126](0126-a-module-declares-its-own-seats.md) — an event is addressed to its emitter, for the same reason a role's verb is addressed to its role
+- [`03-DESIGN/01-to-be/26-the-seats.md`](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/26-the-seats.md) — how a seat is held and handed over
+- mesh-controller #116, #117, #118 — the grants as they now stand: a module serves its own namespace, the control plane may ask any tool
+- Measured 2026-09-28 on the live mesh: an operator credential calling a module's tool over the bus answers; `tools/list` finds nothing

02-DECISIONS/0133-a-module-owns-its-migrations-and-the-mesh-owns-when-they-run.md

@@ -0,0 +1,159 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: superseded
+date: 2026-09-28
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0052-a-step-that-runs-once-before-a-container.md
+superseded-by: 02-DECISIONS/0135-a-module-version-prepares-its-state-before-it-runs.md
+---
+
+# 133. A module owns its migrations, and the mesh owns when they run
+
+## Context
+
+On 2026-09-28 the mesh replaced its own control plane, through its own upgrade path, with a build
+carrying a migration. Nothing applied it. For the next three quarters of an hour every build the mesh
+made was refused by the store with one line — *column "built_contexts" does not exist* — which reached
+only whoever happened to be waiting on that build's reply. The images were built and published, so the
+registry filled with artifacts the mesh has no record of, and the overview went on reporting that every
+module was current ([issue 133](../04-ISSUES/133-the-control-planes-schema-is-migrated-at-birth-and-never-again/00-report.md)).
+
+The schema had been created once, at genesis, by an action in the foundation bundle. Nothing ran it
+again, through many updates of the control plane since.
+
+**The mechanism to do this right already existed and one module used it wrong.**
+[ADR 0052](0052-a-step-that-runs-once-before-a-container.md) makes a run-once container a step the host
+runs to completion before whatever the declaration places after it, and names migrating a schema as the
+case it exists for. Three facts about how it is used today:
+
+- The control plane's manifest had no step at all. The immediate fix was to write one by hand, and that
+  hand-written step repeats three environment variables and three volume mounts from the server
+  resource it precedes — six chances to drift from the thing it prepares.
+- Two other modules hand-write the same shape for the same reason: gitea's admin bootstrap and
+  mosquitto's dynsec seed, each repeating its sibling's image, environment and mounts. One of them
+  ends in `|| true`, which is a lock implemented as a shrug.
+- The catalogue module takes the other road: it migrates its own schema in its own code when it starts.
+  That failure mode is a crash loop rather than a stop — the catalogue restarted 338 times this
+  morning on an unrelated start-time failure, and nothing anywhere said the mesh's graph had a gap.
+
+**What the mesh already has, and what HAL needed stages for.** Ordering a provider before its consumer
+is `providersFirst`, which topologically orders a node's modules. Ordering within a module is
+declaration order, and a run-once container gates everything after it. Remembering that a step has
+already run is the digest of its declaration, recorded only after it exits 0
+([ADR 0018](0018-a-picture-is-read-from-what-runs.md)) — and the image is part of that digest, so a new
+build re-runs it. Three of the four things a stage system provides are therefore already here. The
+fourth — that a module has a schema at all — is the only thing missing.
+
+**Nothing in the catalogue ships a migrations directory.** Of 72 modules, none has one; the modules that
+migrate do it in their own code. So this is not a decision about where SQL files live. It is a decision
+about who runs them and when.
+
+**Two facts bound what is safely expressible.** A node converges toward its own declaration without
+waiting on any other node. And of the five modules that run on more than one machine today — dnsmasq,
+fail2ban, networking, networkmanager, sshd — not one wants a store; every module with a database is on
+exactly one machine.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A container may declare steps to run before it.** The same container, run to completion, with
+different arguments, in order, before it starts. The mesh derives the run-once resources from that
+declaration, so the image, the environment, the volumes, the network and the credentials come from the
+one place they are already described and cannot drift from it.
+
+**A module's migrations are the first user of this, and the module owns them entirely.** The SQL, the
+order, the idempotence, the lock, and which dialect it speaks. The mesh never learns that postgres and
+mssql differ, because it runs the module's own image with the module's own arguments against the
+module's own binding and requires exit 0. A module needing both stores runs one step that does both.
+
+**The mesh owns the moment, and the gate is the guarantee.** Whether a version may serve when its
+schema is not there yet is a deployment question, and the mesh is the only thing that can answer it,
+because the mesh is what starts the container. A step that fails stops the container it precedes, so
+a failed migration is a version that does not serve rather than a version serving against a store it
+does not match.
+
+**Per node, and there is no level.** The step runs wherever the module runs. A step that ran "once,
+somewhere" would leave every other machine with no gate at all, and additive migrations protect old
+code against a new schema, never new code against an old one. The cost is an obligation a migration
+runner already carries: a version table and a lock.
+
+**"Once, mesh-wide" is what holding a seat means.** A step that is not idempotent — seeding an
+account, sending a notice, taking a backup — belongs to a module that holds a seat, where the mesh
+already guarantees one holder, on record, handed over deliberately. That is the answer to the level
+question rather than a field that has to invent an election and keep it somewhere.
+
+**Migrations are forward-only and additive.** The step runs before the *new* container starts, so the
+old one is still running against the new schema for the length of the apply.
+
+**Declared, never inferred.** The control plane cannot see inside an image, so a module that ships
+migrations and declares no step is not refusable at registration; it breaks on its first upgrade. This
+record says so rather than implying a check that cannot exist.
+
+## Options considered
+
+1. **Each module migrates itself when it starts** — what the catalogue does today. Rejected: it turns a
+   schema failure into a crash loop instead of a stop, it is invisible in the declaration so nothing can
+   say the module even has a schema, and two machines running the module both migrate at start with
+   nothing sequencing them.
+2. **The mesh applies migrations itself**, with a driver and a version table per store — HAL's shape.
+   Rejected: the mesh would have to know one store type from another, hold another module's store
+   credentials, and reach a machine to use them, which [ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md) forbids. It is
+   also the reason that shape needs levels: something central has to decide where the once happens.
+3. **A hook lifecycle** — pre-build, post-build, pre-deploy, post-deploy. Rejected: there is no deploy
+   event here to hook. A declaration is a desired state applied in order and reconciled forever, so
+   "pre-deploy" is exactly "a step before this container", pre- and post-build are what a Dockerfile and
+   the artifact list already are, and "post-deploy" has no moment to name.
+4. **A hook level** — once per module, or once per module-node assignment. Rejected as a field, kept as
+   a property: see the decision. A once-per-module step needs cross-node ordering underneath it to be
+   safe, and a node converging without waiting on its neighbours is worth losing on purpose rather than
+   by accident.
+5. **Every module hand-writes its own run-once step** — the immediate fix for the control plane.
+   Rejected as the general answer: it duplicates the resource it precedes, in three places already, and
+   a hand-written step is one the next module forgets. Forgetting it is the fault this record exists
+   for.
+6. **Record a schema level per module in the store.** Rejected: gating makes the invariant true by
+   construction, so a level is a second account of the same fact and the first one to go stale.
+
+## Consequences
+
+**Three hand-written steps collapse into one line each**, and the control plane's own migrate step stops
+repeating its server's environment and mounts.
+
+**The catalogue's self-migration becomes the exception to remove.** One shape, and the mesh's own
+control plane is not an exception to it either.
+
+**A module on two machines with one shared store must lock.** Today none is, so this is an obligation
+stated before it is needed rather than discovered by two concurrent migrations.
+
+**There is still no readiness-gated step.** Only an action carries `verify`; a container has no health
+notion, so "run this once the service answers" remains unexpressible and seeding through a running
+service's API has no home. That is its own decision about a container's readiness, and this record does
+not make it.
+
+**Genesis keeps its own action.** At birth there is no control plane to derive anything from, which is
+what [ADR 0067](0067-genesis-is-a-pivot.md) already says about that moment.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+- **The composition carries the step.** A test on a node's composed declaration: every container that
+  declares steps before it is preceded by them, and the derived step's image, environment, volumes and
+  network equal the container's — so the two cannot drift, which is the failure the hand-written kind
+  has.
+- **A failed step stops what follows.** The host already refuses to go on past a run-once step that did
+  not exit 0; the test for that is extended to a derived one, so the gate is checked rather than
+  assumed.
+- **The mesh's own schema is covered by the same mechanism as everything else.** The control plane
+  declares its step in its own manifest, so the case that failed on 2026-09-28 is the case the test
+  covers.
+- **A module claiming a seat for a once-only step is checked where seats are checked** — the conditions
+  of holding, not a new mechanism.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0052](0052-a-step-that-runs-once-before-a-container.md) — the step this extends
+- [ADR 0018](0018-a-picture-is-read-from-what-runs.md) — a digest is the record that something happened
+- [ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md) — the control plane decides and never touches a machine
+- [ADR 0067](0067-genesis-is-a-pivot.md) — why genesis does it differently, once
+- [issue 133](../04-ISSUES/133-the-control-planes-schema-is-migrated-at-birth-and-never-again/00-report.md) — the failure that produced this record
+- [`03-DESIGN/01-to-be/32-what-a-module-declares.md`](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/32-what-a-module-declares.md) §6 — the lifecycle this sits in
+- Measured 2026-09-28: three hand-written run-once steps repeating their sibling's resource; 0 of 72 modules with a migrations directory; 5 modules on more than one machine, none of them wanting a store

02-DECISIONS/0134-the-mesh-says-what-it-applied.md

@@ -0,0 +1,126 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-28
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+---
+
+# 134. The mesh says what it applied
+
+## Context
+
+The pipeline is observable on the bus from a merge to an artifact, and modules already plug into it:
+the forge emits `pull.merged`, the build machine's seat emits `built`, the catalogue emits `registered`,
+`upgraded` and `rebuild-needed`, providers emit `postgres.database.provisioned` and its siblings. Things
+consume them today — the catalogue consumes `built`, each provider consumes its own provisioning events,
+model-usage consumes `*.usage.*`, the audit logger consumes `**`. Nothing had to be invented for any of
+that; subscribing *is* plugging in.
+
+**It goes dark at the moment it touches a machine.** A host applies a declaration and reports to the
+control plane on the control branch, which only the control plane may read — correctly, because a report
+carries what a machine is and enrolment travels the same way. So nothing on the mesh says *this machine
+now runs version Y of module Z*, or that it refused to, or why.
+
+What that cost on 2026-09-28, in one morning:
+
+- A build result the store refused was visible only to whoever was waiting on that build's reply. For
+  three quarters of an hour the mesh built things and recorded none of them, while the overview said
+  every module was current ([issue 133](../04-ISSUES/133-the-control-planes-schema-is-migrated-at-birth-and-never-again/00-report.md)).
+- A module crash-looping at start — 338 restarts — was found by reading a container's logs by hand.
+  Nothing on the bus said the mesh's graph had stopped learning.
+- A run-once step that fails now stops an upgrade by design ([ADR 0133](0133-a-module-owns-its-migrations-and-the-mesh-owns-when-they-run.md)),
+  and the same silence would cover it: the version simply would not appear.
+
+**And the one thing the control plane does emit is refused by its own account.** Answering a catalogue
+that asks to catch up, it publishes each recorded build under `mesh.mod.control-plane.event.…` — a
+module namespace for a module that does not exist. Its own permissions refuse it, so a catalogue that
+restarts gets nothing and keeps its gap. The control plane has facts to state and nowhere to state
+them.
+
+## Decision
+
+**The mesh emits the deploy half of the pipeline as facts on the bus.** What a machine now runs, and
+what it refused to run and why. Both are facts about the mesh doing its work, in the same form as every
+other fact on the bus, so anything that wants them subscribes the way the catalogue subscribes to
+`built`.
+
+**The control plane states them, as the holder of the `mesh-controller` seat.** Its facts live under the
+seat's own namespace, which is where a role's events belong
+([ADR 0121](0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md),
+[ADR 0129](0129-a-seat-carries-the-protocol-of-its-role.md)) and which survives the control plane being
+replaced. That is also what gives the catch-up replay a subject it may publish instead of an invented
+module namespace.
+
+**Emitted when what a machine runs changes, not on every convergence pass.** A host reconciles
+continuously and reports each time; a fact per pass would be a fact per minute per machine that says
+nothing. The report carries the declaration it applied and what changed, so the control plane has what
+it needs to speak only when there is something to say.
+
+**A refusal is a fact with a subject in it** — which machine, which resource, and the reason as the host
+gave it. A refusal that names only the machine is the silence this record is about, one level up.
+
+**Reports stay where they are.** A node's report remains control traffic that only the control plane
+reads. The deploy facts are derived from it, which makes them second-hand on purpose: one emitter, one
+ordering, and no widening of the narrowest account in the mesh.
+
+## Options considered
+
+1. **Leave it as it is, and let whatever cares ask the control plane.** Rejected: asking for a fact that
+   already arrives is the shape the mesh removed everywhere else, and nothing can react at the moment a
+   machine changes — which is exactly when a graph, an audit or an operator wants to know.
+2. **Each node emits its own facts.** Rejected: it widens every host's account to an event namespace, and
+   a host's authority is deliberately the narrowest in the mesh. Its report already reaches the one thing
+   that can speak for it.
+3. **Widen who may read the control branch.** Rejected: that branch carries what machines say *to* the
+   control plane, enrolment included. Widening its readers widens that too, for an unrelated reason.
+4. **A registry of deploy hooks** — something registers interest and is called. Rejected: an event is
+   already the mechanism; there is nothing to register, and a callback is an address the mesh spent
+   [issue 102](../04-ISSUES/102-an-address-recorded-at-genesis-or-build-does-not-follow-the-nodes-ports/00-report.md)
+   learning not to keep.
+5. **Put the facts on the node's own declaration stream.** Rejected: that stream is last-per-subject by
+   design, so a machine away for an hour gets exactly the current declaration and nothing older. A
+   history of what happened cannot live in a stream built to forget.
+
+## Consequences
+
+**The audit logger gets the deploy half for nothing**, because it consumes everything.
+
+**A failure becomes visible where the mesh is watched** rather than where someone happened to be
+looking. That answers the open question [issue 133](../04-ISSUES/133-the-control-planes-schema-is-migrated-at-birth-and-never-again/00-report.md)
+left about a record the store refused.
+
+**The catch-up replay stops being a burst of events.** With the control plane able to state its own
+facts, replaying history as if it were happening now is a choice rather than the only option — and the
+better shape is the question the catalogue is actually asking, answered once
+([design 33](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/33-the-tools-the-mesh-answers.md)).
+
+**The facts are second-hand.** The control plane says what a machine reported, so a machine that cannot
+reach the bus produces no fact at all. Absence is not health, and what a machine was last heard from
+stays the place that says so.
+
+**The events stream carries more.** Bounded by emitting on change rather than on every pass, and each
+fact is small; the stream's own limits remain what keeps it finite.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+- **The control plane's grant names exactly the subjects it emits**, derived from its seat like every
+  other principal's, and the composed user list is compared against a golden file — so a fact it cannot
+  publish fails a test rather than a catalogue's replay.
+- **A convergence that changed nothing emits nothing.** A test with two identical reports and one
+  expected fact, because the failure this guards against is a fact per minute per machine.
+- **A refusal names its resource.** A test where a host reports a failed resource and the emitted fact
+  carries which one and why, not merely that something went wrong.
+- **What the mesh emits is what something consumes.** The subject a module declares it consumes derives
+  to the subject the control plane publishes — the same agreement test that already keeps the
+  controller's own subscriptions honest.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0041](0041-events-are-a-relationship.md) — an event is a relationship, not a call
+- [ADR 0126](0126-a-module-declares-its-own-seats.md) — an event is addressed to its emitter, because the emitter's identity is the meaning
+- [ADR 0121](0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md), [ADR 0129](0129-a-seat-carries-the-protocol-of-its-role.md) — a role's events belong to the role
+- [ADR 0083](0083-one-push-leaves-the-mesh-consistent.md) — a report is held for the store rather than lost
+- [ADR 0133](0133-a-module-owns-its-migrations-and-the-mesh-owns-when-they-run.md) — the gate whose failure this makes visible
+- [`03-DESIGN/01-to-be/32-what-a-module-declares.md`](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/32-what-a-module-declares.md) §6 — the lifecycle, which ends today at a report nobody else may read
+- Measured 2026-09-28: 45 minutes of builds recorded nowhere with the overview reporting health; a module at 338 restarts found by hand; the control plane's only emitted event refused by its own permissions

02-DECISIONS/0135-a-module-version-prepares-its-state-before-it-runs.md

@@ -0,0 +1,153 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-28
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+supersedes: 0133-a-module-owns-its-migrations-and-the-mesh-owns-when-they-run.md
+---
+
+# 135. A module version prepares its state before it runs
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0133](0133-a-module-owns-its-migrations-and-the-mesh-owns-when-they-run.md) settled who runs a
+module's migrations and when, and it said so in the wrong vocabulary. It put the declaration on a
+*container* — "a container may declare steps to run before it" — and derived the scope of the work from
+the *machine*. Both are wrong at the level a module author works at, and the second is wrong on the
+facts.
+
+**A container is one resource kind the host applies.** A module has code, state and a version; whether
+its artifact is an image, a bundle or something later is the mesh's business. The module-facing
+vocabulary for a module's own code already exists and has nothing to do with a container runtime: a
+module declares **entrypoints** — this file is my tools, this file is my provisioner — and the mesh runs
+them. A manifest that says "run this container with these arguments, and here are the volumes and
+environment again" has an author writing down the machine's business twice.
+
+**And the scope is not the machine's to decide, because the mesh already decided what a state is.** A
+consumer is a module *on a machine* (migration 0015, from
+[issue 022](../04-ISSUES/022-one-credential-per-node-per-provision-not-per-module/00-report.md)):
+the mesh derives a login per consumer and the provider creates a database owned by exactly that login
+([ADR 0048](0048-a-provider-creates-the-credential-the-mesh-minted.md)). So a module on three machines is three
+consumers, three credentials and three databases. There is no shared state for two machines to race over,
+and ADR 0133's central caveat — that a module's migrations must take a lock because two machines might
+migrate at once — describes a situation the mesh does not currently produce.
+
+That correction makes the whole "level" question HAL answered with stages disappear: the scope of
+preparation is the scope of the state, and the mesh knows it.
+
+What the earlier record got right and this one keeps: the module owns the work, the mesh owns the moment,
+the gate is the guarantee, migrations stay forward-only, and none of it can be inferred from inside an
+artifact. What produced it also stands — the control plane was replaced with a build carrying a migration,
+nothing applied it, and for three quarters of an hour every build was refused by the store with one line
+that reached only whoever was waiting on a reply
+([issue 133](../04-ISSUES/133-the-control-planes-schema-is-migrated-at-birth-and-never-again/00-report.md)).
+
+## Decision
+
+**A module version declares an entrypoint that prepares its state.** One name in the manifest, in the
+same vocabulary as the entrypoints it already declares for its tools and its provisioner. No container,
+no command line, no environment, no mounts — those are how a machine runs the module's code, and the
+module already said that once.
+
+**The mesh runs it as it runs that module's own code, to completion, in the module's own context.** Every
+binding, credential and setting the module's code would receive, because it *is* the module's code. How a
+machine does that is the host's business and stays there: for an image artifact it is the step
+[ADR 0052](0052-a-step-that-runs-once-before-a-container.md) already defines, and a later kind of artifact
+changes the host, not the manifest.
+
+**Preparation gates the version.** A version whose preparation did not succeed does not run — anywhere.
+Since the rollout already sends machines one at a time and stops at the first that does not take a
+version, a preparation that fails stops the rollout there, leaving every other machine on the version
+that works.
+
+**Preparation is scoped to the state, and the mesh derives that scope.** State the mesh provisions is per
+consumer — a module on a machine — so preparation happens once per consumer. State the module keeps on
+the machine is per machine, which is the same answer. A module that holds an exclusive seat has one of
+itself, so its preparation happens once by definition. No level, no election, no cross-node ordering, and
+no lock obligation invented for a race the mesh does not create.
+
+**Once per version per state.** A version bump attempts preparation once against each state it has; the
+module's own runner decides there is nothing to do, which is what a runner with a version table does
+anyway. A retry after a partial failure runs it again, so the work is the module's to make safe against
+that — the one obligation no design can remove.
+
+**Forward-only and additive.** Preparation runs while the previous version is still serving, so a
+migration that removes or renames what the old code reads breaks the mesh in the window between the two.
+
+**Declared, never inferred.** The control plane cannot see inside an artifact, so a module that ships
+migrations and declares no entrypoint is not refusable at registration. It breaks on its first upgrade,
+and this record says so rather than implying a check that cannot exist.
+
+## Options considered
+
+1. **A container declares steps before it** — [ADR 0133](0133-a-module-owns-its-migrations-and-the-mesh-owns-when-they-run.md).
+   Superseded, not because the mechanism is wrong but because the *declaration* is in the wrong place: it
+   makes every module author restate the machine's arrangement, and it ties a module's own lifecycle to
+   one resource kind. The host-side mechanism it named is retained and is now an implementation detail.
+2. **Each module prepares itself when it starts** — what the catalogue does today. Rejected: a schema
+   failure becomes a crash loop rather than a stop, nothing in the declaration says the module has a
+   state to prepare, and the version serves the moment it starts rather than after the state is right.
+3. **The mesh applies migrations itself**, with a driver and a version table per store type. Rejected:
+   the mesh would have to know one store from another, hold another module's credentials and reach a
+   machine with them, which [ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md) forbids. It is also what forces a stage
+   system: something central has to decide where the work happens.
+4. **A hook lifecycle** — pre-build, post-build, pre-deploy, post-deploy. Rejected: a declaration is a
+   desired state reconciled forever, so there is no deploy moment to hook. "Pre-deploy" is exactly this
+   record; pre- and post-build are what a recipe and the artifact list already are; "post-deploy" names
+   nothing that happens.
+5. **A declared level** — once per module, or once per assignment. Rejected: the mesh already knows what a
+   state is, so asking an author to choose is asking them to restate a fact the mesh holds, with a chance
+   of contradicting it.
+6. **Record a preparation level per module in the store.** Rejected for the reason ADR 0133 gave and this
+   record keeps: gating makes the invariant true by construction, and a level is a second account of the
+   same fact.
+
+## Consequences
+
+**An author's whole contract is one line, once.** Write the migration in the module's code, name the
+entrypoint that runs it, and every later version rolls out as: build, prepare, run — with nothing
+per-version to remember and nothing about the machine to restate. That is the property this exists for.
+
+**Three hand-written steps in the catalogue collapse**, and the control plane's own migrate step stops
+repeating its server's environment and mounts.
+
+**The catalogue's self-preparation becomes the exception to remove.** One shape, and the mesh's own
+control plane is not an exception either.
+
+**A module scaled across machines with one shared state is not expressible**, and this record does not
+make it so. The mesh gives each consumer its own state; a deliberately shared one is a different
+provision model, and the place the "once, mesh-wide" question would genuinely return. Named here so it is
+a decision when it happens rather than a surprise.
+
+**There is still no readiness-gated step.** Only an action carries `verify`; nothing declares that a
+service answers, so preparation that must happen *after* something is serving — seeding through its own
+API — remains unexpressible.
+
+**Genesis keeps its own action.** At birth there is no control plane to derive anything, which is what
+[ADR 0067](0067-genesis-is-a-pivot.md) says about that moment.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+- **The composition carries the preparation, in the module's own context.** A test on a node's composed
+  declaration: a version declaring a preparation entrypoint is preceded by it, and what it is given
+  equals what the module's own code is given — asserted equal rather than written twice, which is the
+  drift the superseded shape invited.
+- **A preparation that fails stops the version.** The host does not go past a step that did not complete,
+  and the rollout stops at the first machine that did not take a version. Both are existing behaviours
+  with existing tests; the test for preparation asserts the two together — the machine does not run it,
+  and the machines after it are left alone.
+- **Once per version per state.** A test that a second convergence of the same version prepares nothing,
+  and that a new version prepares again.
+- **The mesh's own control plane declares one.** The case that failed on 2026-09-28 is the case the tests
+  cover, rather than a case a comment says is covered.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0133](0133-a-module-owns-its-migrations-and-the-mesh-owns-when-they-run.md) — what this supersedes, and why
+- [ADR 0052](0052-a-step-that-runs-once-before-a-container.md) — the host-side step that implements it for an image artifact
+- [ADR 0048](0048-a-provider-creates-the-credential-the-mesh-minted.md), [issue 022](../04-ISSUES/022-one-credential-per-node-per-provision-not-per-module/00-report.md) — a consumer is a module on a machine, which is what makes the scope derivable
+- [ADR 0018](0018-a-picture-is-read-from-what-runs.md) — a digest is the record that something happened
+- [ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md) — the control plane decides and never touches a machine
+- [ADR 0134](0134-the-mesh-says-what-it-applied.md) — what makes a failed preparation visible
+- [issue 133](../04-ISSUES/133-the-control-planes-schema-is-migrated-at-birth-and-never-again/00-report.md) — the failure that produced both records

02-DECISIONS/0136-a-step-gates-its-module-not-the-machine.md

@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-28
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0052-a-step-that-runs-once-before-a-container.md
+---
+
+# 136. A step gates its module, not the machine
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0052](0052-a-step-that-runs-once-before-a-container.md) made a run-once container a step the host
+runs to completion, and gave it the same reach a failed action has: it stops everything the declaration
+places after it. When the only steps on the mesh were a broker's seed and a forge's admin account, that
+reach was invisible — the thing after the step was the container the step existed for, in the same
+module.
+
+[ADR 0135](0135-a-module-version-prepares-its-state-before-it-runs.md) made a step something the mesh
+derives for **any** module that prepares its state, and that turns the reach into a fault. A module
+whose database is briefly unreachable now stops every module declared after it on that machine, for as
+long as it is unreachable.
+
+**The host already rejected this for every other shape, and says why in its own loop.** From
+[issue 011](../04-ISSUES/011-one-broken-module-blocks-every-other/00-report.md):
+
+> It used to stop at the first one, and that made one broken resource hold the whole machine hostage: a
+> module declaring a package that does not exist meant every module ordered after it was never applied,
+> for ever, and the mesh reported "failed" without saying that the rest had not been tried. A machine
+> with one bad module and nine good ones ran none of the nine.
+
+Everything is attempted and every failure reported — except an action and a run-once step, kept as the
+deliberate exceptions. So the mesh has two rules about the same question and the wider one is now
+reachable by any module that declares a schema.
+
+**And it deadlocks a case the catalogue already named.** The catalogue migrates its own schema when it
+starts rather than in a step, and says why in its code: *a schema step that had to reach the provider
+over the overlay would block the very apply that brings the overlay up*. With a machine-wide gate that
+is exactly right — the step fails, the apply stops, the overlay module after it is never applied, and
+the next reconcile is blocked the same way. The module that most obviously wants a step could not have
+one.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A step gates its own module.** A run-once container that does not complete stops the rest of *that
+module's* resources and nothing else. Every other module on the machine is attempted, as every other
+shape already is.
+
+**An action still gates the machine.** Genesis is a row of actions, each making the next possible, and
+they belong to no module — there is nothing narrower for their reach to be.
+
+**What was not attempted is reported, not inferred from silence.** A skipped resource appears in the
+machine's account of the apply as skipped, with the reason, because "not attempted" and "nothing to do"
+are different answers and only one of them is somebody's to fix.
+
+**A module is the part of a resource's identity before the first dot**, which is how the mesh composes
+them. What the mesh declares in its own right — a guard, an opening, the adoption's own resources —
+belongs to no module, and its gate is therefore the machine's.
+
+## Options considered
+
+1. **Leave the reach as it is.** Rejected: it reintroduces, through a mechanism now derived for every
+   module, exactly the fault issue 011 removed. A mesh where one module's unreachable database stops a
+   machine converging is worse than one where that module alone is behind.
+2. **Make preparation not a gate at all** — run it and carry on. Rejected: then a version serves against
+   a state nobody shaped, which is the whole of what ADR 0135 exists to prevent.
+3. **Order every module's step before everything else on the machine**, so a gate stops nothing that
+   matters. Rejected: it inverts the order a module needs — its files and directories are declared before
+   its step because the step reads them — and it would still stop later modules.
+4. **Let a module declare how far its step reaches.** Rejected: the answer is the same for every module,
+   and a field would let one be wrong about it.
+
+## Consequences
+
+**The catalogue can move to a step.** The reason it migrates at start — that a step blocks the apply
+that would make its provider reachable — stops being true: the step fails, that module waits, the
+overlay comes up, and the next reconcile prepares it. One shape for the whole mesh, which is what
+ADR 0135 asked for and could not have had.
+
+**A module can sit behind while the machine is otherwise current.** That is the honest state and it is
+what the report now says. It also means a preparation that never succeeds is a module that never
+upgrades, quietly, until somebody reads the report — which is an argument for
+[ADR 0134](0134-the-mesh-says-what-it-applied.md) rather than against this.
+
+**A module's resources must be ordered within the module for the gate to mean anything.** They already
+are: the mesh composes a module's resources in the order its manifest declares them, and its own
+workload comes after the files it reads.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+- **A failed step stops its module and nothing else.** A test with two modules: the one whose step
+  failed does not start its workload, the other starts, and the error still says the failure gated
+  something. It fails against the previous behaviour, which is how it was written.
+- **An action still stops the machine.** The existing test for a failed action is unchanged, and a step
+  with no module in its identity — which is what genesis carries — takes the same path.
+- **The report names what was skipped.** Asserted in the same test, because a gate nobody can see is
+  indistinguishable from a module that had nothing to do.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0052](0052-a-step-that-runs-once-before-a-container.md) — the step this narrows
+- [ADR 0135](0135-a-module-version-prepares-its-state-before-it-runs.md) — what made the reach reachable
+- [issue 011](../04-ISSUES/011-one-broken-module-blocks-every-other/00-report.md) — the same fault, removed once already
+- [ADR 0134](0134-the-mesh-says-what-it-applied.md) — how a module left behind becomes visible
+- mesh-host `internal/apply` — the loop whose own comment argued this case for every other shape

02-DECISIONS/0137-a-machine-says-which-networks-it-routes.md

@@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: superseded
+date: 2026-09-28
+deciders: jochen
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md
+reconstructed: false
+superseded-by: 02-DECISIONS/0140-the-filter-constrains-what-arrives-from-outside.md
+---
+
+# 137. A machine says which networks it routes
+
+## Context
+
+The filter the mesh derives denies forwarding by default, because without a forward chain it says
+nothing about a container's published port
+([ADR 0100](0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md), [issue 047](../04-ISSUES/047-the-firewall-does-not-cover-published-container-ports/00-report.md)).
+To keep a machine's own containers working it then allows two ranges: the container runtime's
+default bridge pool, and the pool its compose files are given. Those two are named in the
+controller's code, with a comment saying what the gap is:
+
+> A machine whose runtime is configured with something else needs this to say so — which is a thing
+> the mesh cannot derive and a reason this list is named here rather than computed.
+
+**There was no way to say so.** The list was a constant. A machine whose guests live anywhere else
+was filtered by a rule that looked deliberate and was a guess.
+
+**Measured, on the day a workstation was converged.** Flipping it cut egress for five of its
+container networks at once, and for every network its test beds create — the beds allocate a fresh
+range per run, from a pool neither default covers. Nothing reported a fault. The containers could
+not reach anything, the machine went on reporting that it had applied what it was told, and the
+converge preview had said nothing about it either, because the preview lists what *listens* and
+routing is not a listener.
+
+**And two questions, not one.** A guest also asks its host for an address and for names. Both arrive
+at the input chain, where nothing declared them, so denying by default left the guests of a routed
+network with no address and no resolution — which is not a closed port but a network that does not
+function, asked for by this machine's own guest.
+
+**Why the machine cannot simply be read.** A test bed creates its bridge while it runs, between one
+declaration and the next, so a filter derived from what the machine last reported would be correct
+only for the networks that already existed when it was composed. A declared range covers the ones
+that do not exist yet.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A machine says which networks it routes for what it hosts, and the filter forwards them.** A
+node-level fact, beside the node's public domain
+([ADR 0066](0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md)) and for the same reason: the
+machine routes them, and the module that loads the filter holds a seat and may be replaced.
+
+**Added to the runtime's defaults, never replacing them.** A machine that names one range has not
+stopped hosting whatever was already on the runtime's own pools, and replacing would trade one
+silent breakage for another.
+
+**Their guests keep address and name service.** For a network that was named, the input chain admits
+that network's own DHCP and DNS, and nothing else: everything else a guest might want from its host
+is a port somebody declares, like every other port on this machine.
+
+**Said in CIDR form and checked when it is said.** An entry that does not parse is a line nftables
+refuses, and a refused ruleset is a machine filtering nothing while its unit reports a fault — so
+the refusal happens where a person can read it, not on the machine.
+
+**A machine that says nothing is filtered exactly as before.** Every machine already converged is
+untouched by this.
+
+## Options considered
+
+1. **Leave it constant and edit the code per installation.** Rejected: the value is a property of
+   one machine, the code is the whole mesh's, and the two ranges as they stand describe a machine
+   whose runtime was left at its defaults. It is also how this got here.
+2. **Derive it from what the machine reports.** Rejected as insufficient, not as wrong: it cannot
+   cover a network created between two declarations, which is precisely the case that was broken. It
+   would also make the filter follow whatever appeared on the machine, which is a firewall that
+   widens itself.
+3. **A per-node setting on the module that loads the filter.** Rejected: the machine routes the
+   networks. The filter module holds a node-scoped seat and is meant to be replaceable, and a
+   replacement must not lose the machine's own truth.
+4. **Replace the defaults with what is said.** Rejected: see the decision. The first machine to name
+   its bed range would lose its containers.
+5. **Admit all input from a routed network, not only address and name service.** Rejected: that is
+   every port on the machine open to anything it hosts, which is the derivation abandoned.
+
+## Consequences
+
+**The converge preview says what a machine routes**, including when it routes nothing but the
+defaults, with the command that changes it. The preview's own sentence about traffic it cannot
+preview stays, because a tunnel and the found firewall's NAT are still not previewable.
+
+**A machine whose guests are already broken by an earlier flip is fixed by saying its networks and
+pushing**, with no flip to undo.
+
+**The list is one more thing that can be wrong and stale.** A range removed from the machine and
+left here keeps forwarding for a network that no longer exists, which admits nothing, because there
+is no guest on it to admit. That is the safe direction of being out of date.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+- **What a machine says it routes is forwarded, and its guests keep address and name service.** A
+  test renders a ruleset for a machine that names one range and asserts both chains, per chain body
+  so a line in the wrong chain cannot pass it. It fails against the previous behaviour, which is how
+  it was written.
+- **The runtime's own defaults survive naming a range.** Asserted in the same test.
+- **A machine that names nothing renders byte-identically to one that names nil**, so every machine
+  already behind this filter is untouched.
+- **Each family is matched in its own syntax.** A test with one v4 and one v6 network asserts
+  `ip saddr` and `ip6 saddr`, because one set holding both is a syntax error and a ruleset that does
+  not load is a machine filtering nothing.
+- **An entry that is not a network is refused where it is said**, by the parse in the setter.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0100](0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md) — the derived filter this completes
+- [ADR 0066](0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md) — the precedent for a node-level fact
+- [issue 047](../04-ISSUES/047-the-firewall-does-not-cover-published-container-ports/00-report.md) — why there is a forward chain at all
+- [issue 137](../04-ISSUES/137-converging-a-machine-cut-off-its-own-guests/00-report.md) — the measurement that produced this
+- mesh-controller `internal/catalogue/filtering.go` — the constant whose own comment named this gap

02-DECISIONS/0138-an-assignment-binds-an-endpoint-and-says-how-far-it-reaches.md

@@ -0,0 +1,179 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-28
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0045-a-machine-firewall-is-the-sum-of-what-it-listens-on.md
+---
+
+# 138. An assignment binds an endpoint and says how far it reaches
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0045](0045-a-machine-firewall-is-the-sum-of-what-it-listens-on.md) settled that a machine's
+packet filter is derived from what its modules declare they listen on, and that the `from` of a
+listen "is the whole of public-versus-internal". That was true of the packet filter, and it turned
+out to be true of nothing else.
+
+Reachability is now settled three times, in three places, by three mechanisms that cannot disagree
+out loud ([issue 140](../04-ISSUES/140-an-endpoints-reach-is-not-declared/00-report.md)):
+
+- **The filter** reads a listen's source, and a per-node setting may override it. That setting has
+  exactly one caller in the control plane — the function that builds the node's rules.
+- **The names** come from a route contribution, which names a label and a port and says nothing
+  about reach. The reverse proxy composes a **public** name and an **internal** name for every route
+  it is given, because it can.
+- **The certificate authority** follows from which names exist. Measured on the control-node: an
+  identity provider carries a public certificate valid 90 days and an internal one valid 24 hours and
+  renewed daily. No assignment asked for either.
+
+So *this endpoint must not be public* cannot be written. It is therefore enforced by nothing, while a
+public certificate for that very name is obtained automatically — the fault
+[how-we-build.md](../00-META/how-we-build.md) names, an unenforced rule being indistinguishable from
+a wrong one, with the additional cost that the wrong thing is done eagerly.
+
+And a port that is not routed cannot be spoken about at all beyond the filter. The forge serves git
+over ssh; that endpoint has no name, no certificate and no way to be called public except a key only
+the filter reads.
+
+**Two per-node settings already exist and are half of this.** One gives a module's declared port a
+machine port. One overrides a declared port's source. They key on port numbers, so nothing ties a
+port to the route that serves it: a route contribution names a port too, and the two are equal only
+by coincidence.
+
+**Where this belongs is already decided.** [ADR 0046](0046-a-module-configuration-is-its-assignments-not-its-manifest.md)
+says a module's configuration is its assignments. Whether the forge answers git-over-ssh from the
+public internet is a fact about one installation and one machine, not a property of the software —
+and [ADR 0112](0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md) already refuses an
+installation's decisions in a definition.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **Leave reach in the manifest, as `from` today.** Rejected: it is an installation's decision
+   written into the definition, and it cannot differ between two machines running the same module —
+   which is exactly the case the forge presents.
+2. **Extend the existing source override to the names and the certificate, without naming
+   endpoints.** Rejected: it keys on a port number. A module's route contribution names a port as
+   well, and nothing says the two are the same thing, so one statement cannot be made to reach all
+   three mechanisms. Naming the endpoint is what makes that possible.
+3. **Derive reach from whether the node has a public domain recorded.** Rejected: that is a property
+   of the machine, and two endpoints on one machine differ — a database and a web front end on the
+   same host.
+4. **A fourth reach for "public name, internal authority"** — a name that resolves publicly and must
+   not appear in a public issuance log, obtained by DNS-01. Deferred, not rejected: it is a real case
+   and it is a question about which challenge an authority uses, not about how far an endpoint
+   reaches. Left to the certificate work as an open question.
+5. **Make the manifest silent on reach and require every assignment to state it.** Rejected for the
+   transition: every endpoint reachable today would close until an assignment named it, which is a
+   flag day across the whole catalogue.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A module declares named endpoints.** An endpoint is one port the module serves, with a name the
+module chooses, its protocol, and what it is for. A route contribution **names the endpoint it
+routes** rather than repeating a port number. The manifest says what the module serves and what it
+would serve it to by default; it does not say what this installation does with it.
+
+**An assignment binds each endpoint and says how far it reaches.** Per node: the machine port the
+endpoint is published on, and its **reach** — one of `internal`, `public` or `both`. An assignment
+that states nothing keeps the manifest's default, so no machine changes until an assignment says so.
+
+**Reach means all three mechanisms at once, and is the only thing that decides them.**
+
+- `internal` — the filter opens the machine port to the private network; the proxy serves the
+  internal name and not the public one; the certificate comes from the mesh's own authority.
+- `public` — the filter opens it to anywhere; the proxy serves the public name; the certificate
+  comes from the public authority.
+- `both` — both names, each from its own authority, and the filter opens to anywhere.
+
+**An endpoint that is not routed is reached but never named.** An endpoint with no route contribution
+yields filter rules and nothing else: no name is composed and no certificate is requested. Git over
+ssh is that case, and it is the case the model could not express.
+
+**The authority stops being chosen by which names happen to exist.** The proxy composes the names the
+assignments asked for, and asks each name's own authority for it. A name nobody asked for is not
+composed, so it is not certified.
+
+**The two existing settings are this, completed.** The per-node port mapping becomes the endpoint's
+binding. The per-node source override becomes its reach, widened from the filter alone to the names
+and the certificate as well.
+
+## Progressive insight — 2026-09-29, from building it
+
+**Reach does not mean the same thing to the filter for an endpoint the proxy serves.** The decision
+above says `internal` means "the filter opens the machine port to the private network" and `public`
+means "the filter opens it to anywhere". For a routed endpoint the second half is wrong, and
+[ADR 0045](0045-a-machine-firewall-is-the-sum-of-what-it-listens-on.md) already said so before this
+record was written: *a public service is exposed through the proxy, not by opening its own port* — it
+listens `from: mesh`, only the proxy reaches it, and it is exposed by name.
+
+Found by trying to express one real module, not by review. Its routed name must be public, because
+browsers post to it; its machine-side port must not be, because that port serves the dashboard in
+cleartext. Under one value driving both, saying "public" would have reopened a port an operator had
+just closed. Measured the same evening: that module's routed name answered from the internet over TLS
+while its machine-side port was refused from the same place. The port is not the path.
+
+So the reach of a **routed** endpoint asks for names, and its port keeps what the manifest said. The
+reach of an **unrouted** endpoint — git over ssh, a mail port, the bus — governs the port, because
+there is no name and the port is the only way in. That is the same split this record already draws in
+*an endpoint that is not routed is reached but never named*; what it got wrong was carrying the filter
+across it.
+
+This corrects a fact, not the decision: one statement per endpoint, three things derived from it and
+none of them deciding on its own, all stand. The table in the decision should be read with the filter
+column applying to an unrouted endpoint.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **A manifest gains endpoint names, and a route contribution names an endpoint instead of a port.**
+  Every routed module's manifest changes. The word ships one release before any manifest uses it, and
+  reaches the build machine and the control plane first.
+- **One derived value is read by three things** — the filter's rules, the proxy's contributions, the
+  certificate request — so they can no longer disagree, and a disagreement becomes a refusal at the
+  assignment rather than a surprise on a machine.
+- **A name that must not be public becomes writable, and therefore checkable.** It also gives
+  [issue 129](../04-ISSUES/129-nothing-makes-a-machine-trust-the-meshs-authority/00-report.md) a
+  declared answer to read: which endpoints are internal is what says whose root must be installed
+  where.
+- **[Issue 139](../04-ISSUES/139-an-internal-route-name-resolves-to-the-consumers-node/00-report.md)
+  becomes answerable**: the endpoint's assignment names the machine that serves it, which is the fact
+  the internal name should be composed from.
+- **Reach becomes reportable.** The mesh can say, per endpoint, where it is reachable from and which
+  authority holds its certificate — neither of which `status` can say today.
+- **This narrows [ADR 0045](0045-a-machine-firewall-is-the-sum-of-what-it-listens-on.md).** Its
+  decision stands: the firewall is derived and host-applied, not a provider. What no longer holds is
+  that a listen's `from` is the whole of public-versus-internal; it is the filter's share of a
+  statement that also governs names and certificates.
+- **What got harder:** every endpoint needs a name, including a module that serves exactly one port
+  and had no reason to name it. And an installation that wants a module public must now say so on the
+  assignment rather than inheriting it from the definition, which is more to say and the reason it is
+  right.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+- **One module, two endpoints, different reach.** A module declaring an internal endpoint and a
+  public one renders a filter opening one to the private network and one to anywhere, asserted per
+  chain body so a rule in the wrong chain cannot pass.
+- **The names follow the reach.** The same module's routed endpoint composes the internal name only
+  when internal, the public name only when public, and both when both — and a certificate is
+  requested from the matching authority for each name composed and for no other. This fails against
+  the previous behaviour, where both names and both certificates are always composed, which is how
+  it is written.
+- **An unrouted endpoint is filtered and never named.** Asserted for an endpoint with reach and no
+  route contribution: rules rendered, no contribution, no certificate request.
+- **An assignment naming an endpoint the module does not declare is refused where it is said**, as is
+  a reach that is not one of the three — before it reaches a machine, because a ruleset that does not
+  load is a machine filtering nothing.
+- **An assignment that states nothing renders byte-identically to today**, so every machine already
+  converged is untouched until its assignment says otherwise.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0045](0045-a-machine-firewall-is-the-sum-of-what-it-listens-on.md) — narrowed here
+- [ADR 0046](0046-a-module-configuration-is-its-assignments-not-its-manifest.md) — where reach belongs
+- [ADR 0066](0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md) — the public name this composes
+- [ADR 0112](0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md) — why reach is not a definition's
+- [issue 140](../04-ISSUES/140-an-endpoints-reach-is-not-declared/00-report.md) — the measurement
+- [issue 139](../04-ISSUES/139-an-internal-route-name-resolves-to-the-consumers-node/00-report.md),
+  [issue 129](../04-ISSUES/129-nothing-makes-a-machine-trust-the-meshs-authority/00-report.md)

02-DECISIONS/0139-a-network-is-forwarded-because-a-module-declared-it.md

@@ -0,0 +1,137 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: superseded
+date: 2026-09-28
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0137-a-machine-says-which-networks-it-routes.md
+superseded-by: 02-DECISIONS/0140-the-filter-constrains-what-arrives-from-outside.md
+---
+
+# 139. A network is forwarded because a module declared it
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0137](0137-a-machine-says-which-networks-it-routes.md), decided the same week, gave a machine a
+way to say which networks it routes for its guests. It was written because the derived filter's
+forward chain allowed two ranges named as constants in the control plane's source — the container
+runtime's bridge pool, and part of the pool its compose files are given — with a comment admitting
+the gap: *a machine whose runtime is configured with something else needs this to say so, which is a
+thing the mesh cannot derive.*
+
+**It can be derived, and from the right place.** Measured on the last machine still to be converged
+([issue 141](../04-ISSUES/141-the-forward-chain-does-not-follow-the-modules/00-report.md)): twenty-one
+container networks, nine inside the runtime's bridge pool, twelve in the other private range, and six
+of those outside the constant's lower bound — so the flip would have cut their guests off exactly as
+it did on the workstation that produced 0137.
+
+Naming a range to cover the six is what 0137 provides for, and it is the wrong instrument. Of those
+six networks, **four are networks the mesh's own modules declare**, present as network resources in
+the node's plan and created by the host because a module asked for them. **Two are the predecessor's
+leftovers** — compose networks of services the mesh does not run. Any range wide enough to keep the
+four forwards the two as well: a firewall widened by hand to protect networks that should not exist.
+
+The mesh already knows which of the twenty-one are its own, because it made them.
+
+**And the node's configuration is meant to follow the modules assigned to it.** That is the mesh's
+founding shape — the machine runs modules, and its files, its filter and its accounts are composed
+from what runs there ([ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md),
+[ADR 0010](0010-delivery.md),
+[ADR 0045](0045-a-machine-firewall-is-the-sum-of-what-it-listens-on.md)). The forward chain is the
+one derived thing that consults a constant and a list a person types.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **Keep 0137 as it stands** — two constants plus a named list. Rejected: the list is written in
+   addresses, and addresses are what the runtime allocates, so the only entry safe enough to keep a
+   machine working is wider than the truth. It cannot distinguish a network the mesh made from one
+   left behind, which is the distinction that decides whether forwarding it is correct.
+2. **Derive it from what the machine reports.** Still rejected, on 0137's own grounds: a test bed
+   creates its bridge between one declaration and the next, and a filter that follows whatever
+   appeared on a machine is a firewall that widens itself. **This decision is not that** — see below.
+3. **Have the control plane allocate each module network's range from a pool it owns,** so it can
+   render the address itself. Rejected: more machinery for no gain. The runtime already allocates and
+   the host already knows, and taking allocation over means the mesh owning an address space it has no
+   other reason to own.
+4. **Have each module declare its network's range.** Rejected by
+   [ADR 0112](0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md): a definition names no address,
+   and the same definition runs on machines whose runtimes have allocated differently.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A network is forwarded because a module declared it.** Per node, the forward chain forwards the
+networks of the modules assigned there, and by default nothing else. A module unassigned stops being
+forwarded at the next reconcile.
+
+**The host resolves a declared network to its addresses.** A network resource carries a name; the
+runtime allocates the subnet when the network is created. So the control plane declares *forward the
+networks these modules asked for* and the host — which made them, and already resolves a container by
+its name — renders the addresses. [ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md) holds: the host applies, it does
+not decide.
+
+**Deriving from the declaration is not deriving from the machine.** Both of 0137's objections fall
+away. The set is known before the network exists, because a module declared it, so a network created
+between two declarations is already in the one that asked for it. And it cannot widen itself: a
+network nobody declared is never forwarded, however it appeared on the machine.
+
+**The runtime's own default bridge is forwarded, from what the runtime reports.** Containers that name
+no module network attach to it, and it belongs to the runtime rather than to any module — so the host
+renders it from what the runtime says, not from a range named in the control plane. The constants go.
+
+**What a machine says is for guests no module declares.** A test bed is not a module and its range is
+not a module's; that is the case 0137's mechanism is for, and it keeps it — added to the derived set,
+never replacing it, as 0137 decided. Narrowed to that, it is named for it.
+
+**Their guests keep address and name service**, per declared network, unchanged from
+[ADR 0137](0137-a-machine-says-which-networks-it-routes.md): the input chain admits that network's own
+DHCP and DNS and nothing else.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **The two constants are removed**, and with them the class of fault that a machine's guests depend
+  on a range that describes some other machine.
+- **This is a behaviour change, not a refactor.** On the machine measured, the derived set and the
+  constant do not cover the same ground — that is the whole reason for the record. A machine whose
+  module networks happen to fall inside the old ranges renders the same rules.
+- **A range that exists only to keep a leftover alive becomes visible as such**, because it will not
+  be in the derived set and has to be said out loud to survive.
+- **`node networks` narrows** to guests no module declares, and the preview says which of a machine's
+  networks are the mesh's and which are not, so the difference is readable before a flip rather than
+  after.
+- **A module's declaration gains nothing.** It already declares its network; what changes is that the
+  filter reads it.
+- **What got harder:** the host renders part of the forward chain from what it created, so the
+  control plane no longer holds the whole rule set as text. The rule the mesh states is the set of
+  networks; the addresses are the machine's.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+- **Only declared networks are forwarded.** A node with two modules that declare networks renders
+  forward rules for exactly those two, and none for a third network present on the machine that no
+  module declared. This fails against the previous behaviour, which forwards by range and cannot tell
+  them apart, and that is how it is written.
+- **Unassigning a module removes its network's rule** at the next reconcile, asserted on the rendered
+  chain rather than on the intent.
+- **Guests of a declared network keep address and name service**, asserted per chain body so a line in
+  the wrong chain cannot pass — carried from 0137.
+- **The runtime's own default bridge comes from the runtime**, asserted by rendering for a runtime
+  whose default bridge is somewhere other than the range the constant named.
+- **A machine that names a range for guests no module declares still gets it**, added to the derived
+  set and not replacing it.
+- **Each family is matched in its own syntax**, carried from 0137: one set holding both is a syntax
+  error, and a ruleset that does not load is a machine filtering nothing while its unit reports a
+  fault.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0137](0137-a-machine-says-which-networks-it-routes.md) — narrowed here; its mechanism keeps the
+  case it is right for
+- [ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md) — the host applies; the addresses are the machine's
+- [ADR 0045](0045-a-machine-firewall-is-the-sum-of-what-it-listens-on.md) — the filter is derived from
+  what runs there
+- [ADR 0112](0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md) — why a module does not name its
+  range
+- [issue 141](../04-ISSUES/141-the-forward-chain-does-not-follow-the-modules/00-report.md) — the
+  measurement
+- [issue 137](../04-ISSUES/137-converging-a-machine-cut-off-its-own-guests/00-report.md) — the
+  breakage that produced 0137

02-DECISIONS/0140-the-filter-constrains-what-arrives-from-outside.md

@@ -0,0 +1,146 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-28
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0045-a-machine-firewall-is-the-sum-of-what-it-listens-on.md
+supersedes:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0137-a-machine-says-which-networks-it-routes.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0139-a-network-is-forwarded-because-a-module-declared-it.md
+---
+
+# 140. The filter constrains what arrives from outside, and says nothing about a machine's own guests
+
+## Context
+
+The filter the mesh derives blocks traffic passing *through* a machine unless something allows it,
+because a container's published port is traffic passing through rather than traffic arriving at the
+machine itself ([ADR 0100](0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md),
+[issue 047](../04-ISSUES/047-the-firewall-does-not-cover-published-container-ports/00-report.md)).
+Having blocked all of it, the filter then had to let the machine's own containers reach outward again.
+It does that by listing the address ranges those containers sit on.
+
+As rendered on a converged workstation today:
+
+```
+policy drop
+ct state established,related accept
+ip saddr 172.16.0.0/12 accept
+ip saddr 192.168.128.0/17 accept
+ip saddr 10.0.0.0/8 accept
+ip saddr 192.168.16.0/20 accept
+... four more
+```
+
+Two of those ranges were constants in the control plane's source. The rest were typed by the operator
+after [ADR 0137](0137-a-machine-says-which-networks-it-routes.md), which existed to make the typing
+possible, because converging that workstation had cut every one of its containers off from the
+internet and nothing reported a fault
+([issue 137](../04-ISSUES/137-converging-a-machine-cut-off-its-own-guests/00-report.md)).
+
+**The list is the mistake, not its contents.** Every attempt to make it correct fails the same way.
+A constant describes one machine. A typed range goes stale, and cannot tell a network the mesh made
+from one a predecessor left behind — measured on the control-node, where six such ranges fall outside
+the constants and two of the six belong to services the mesh does not run
+([issue 141](../04-ISSUES/141-the-forward-chain-does-not-follow-the-modules/00-report.md)).
+[ADR 0139](0139-a-network-is-forwarded-because-a-module-declared-it.md) tried to generate the same
+list from the modules and put half the rule set on the machine to do it. Three records, one list, and
+the list should not exist.
+
+**Because the mesh has no policy about a container reaching outward.** What the filter is for is
+stated in [ADR 0045](0045-a-machine-firewall-is-the-sum-of-what-it-listens-on.md): which port is open,
+and to whom. That is about what arrives. A container of this machine's own opening a connection to
+something else is not a port being opened to anybody, and enumerating the addresses it might do so
+from is bookkeeping about the machine's internal plumbing, which the mesh neither owns nor can know.
+
+**The system being replaced never had this fault, and its rule says why.** The chain still protecting
+the control-node applies only to traffic arriving on that machine's outward link, and leaves
+everything else alone. The mesh's filter dropped that distinction and replaced it with a list of
+addresses.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **Keep the list and generate it better** — from the modules' declared networks, or from what the
+   machine reports. Rejected: [ADR 0139](0139-a-network-is-forwarded-because-a-module-declared-it.md)
+   is that, and it puts part of the rule set on the machine, which makes the rule set partly the
+   machine's and the derivation advisory.
+2. **Name the guest links instead of their addresses, and allow only those.** Rejected as more than is
+   needed: it fails in the safe direction, but it is still a list that has to keep up with the
+   machine, and the thing it protects against — a container reaching outward — is not a thing the mesh
+   has a position on.
+3. **Do not block traffic passing through at all.** Rejected: that is
+   [issue 047](../04-ISSUES/047-the-firewall-does-not-cover-published-container-ports/00-report.md),
+   where a published port was reachable from anywhere because no rule mentioned it.
+4. **Constrain what arrives from outside, and nothing else.** Adopted.
+
+## Decision
+
+**The filter constrains traffic arriving from outside the machine, and says nothing about traffic that
+did not.** Traffic passing through the machine is allowed unless it arrived on one of the machine's
+outward links, in which case it is allowed only where a declared endpoint's reach admits it
+([ADR 0138](0138-an-assignment-binds-an-endpoint-and-says-how-far-it-reaches.md)). A container of this
+machine's own reaching anywhere is not filtered, because the mesh has no position on it.
+
+**A machine says which of its links face outside.** One node-level fact, reported by the machine the
+way it already reports the kind of firewall it found and the tunnel it carries — not a setting, not a
+list of addresses, and not something anybody types. It does not change when a module is added or
+removed, which is what separates it from the list it replaces.
+
+**A machine that has reported no outward link is sent no filter.** Rendering a rule around a link
+whose name is not known produces a rule set that does not load, which is a machine filtering nothing
+while its unit reports success. The refusal happens in the control plane, where a person reads it, and
+the machine keeps the filter it already has.
+
+**No addresses of the machine's own networks appear in the filter.** The two constants are removed and
+`node networks` is removed with them, along with everything any machine was told to say through it.
+Ports continue to follow the modules exactly as before: a module assigned to a machine opens the port
+its assignment says it reaches on, and nothing about a network is said anywhere.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **Three records collapse into one rule.** 0137 and 0139 are superseded. What 0137 was right about —
+  that converging a machine had silently cut off its own containers, and that nothing previewed it — is
+  answered by removing the cause rather than by giving the operator a way to compensate for it.
+- **Every machine already converged loses its declared ranges and keeps working**, because the traffic
+  those ranges allowed is now allowed by not having arrived from outside. The workstation's five ranges
+  and the laptop's one are deleted rather than migrated.
+- **A machine's test beds stop being a special case.** A bed's network is created while the machine
+  runs and was the case no list could cover; it is now covered by not being mentioned.
+- **A new fact travels in the report**, and the control plane refuses to compose a filter without it,
+  so the order of the roll-out matters: the machines report before the control plane depends on it.
+- **A machine with more than one outward link says so**, and a machine that acquires one while the mesh
+  is not looking is treated as internal until its next report. That window is the cost of this shape;
+  it is bounded by the report interval, and it exists on machines whose outward link changes, which
+  are the machines with nothing published to the outside.
+- **What got harder:** nothing in the declaration, and one more thing a machine must be able to work
+  out about itself. A machine that cannot say which link faces outside cannot be given a filter.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+- **A machine's own container reaches outward with no network named anywhere.** A bed converges a
+  machine carrying containers on several networks, none of them mentioned in any setting, and each
+  reaches out afterwards. This fails against the previous behaviour, where the same flip cut them off,
+  and that is how it is written.
+- **A port declared reachable from outside is reachable; one that is not, is not.** Probed from off the
+  machine's private network, for a published port and for an undeclared one, before and after the flip.
+- **A network created after the filter was composed needs no new filter.** A network is made on the
+  machine after its last declaration and a container on it reaches out, with nothing re-sent.
+- **No address of a machine's own networks appears in a rendered filter**, asserted on the text so a
+  range cannot creep back in.
+- **A machine that reports no outward link is sent no filter, and the refusal names it** — asserted in
+  the control plane, and that the machine's existing filter is left alone.
+- **A machine reporting two outward links has both constrained**, asserted per chain body so a rule
+  covering one and not the other cannot pass.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0045](0045-a-machine-firewall-is-the-sum-of-what-it-listens-on.md) — what the filter is for
+- [ADR 0138](0138-an-assignment-binds-an-endpoint-and-says-how-far-it-reaches.md) — what admits traffic
+  arriving from outside
+- [ADR 0100](0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md) — why traffic passing through is
+  filtered at all
+- [ADR 0137](0137-a-machine-says-which-networks-it-routes.md),
+  [ADR 0139](0139-a-network-is-forwarded-because-a-module-declared-it.md) — superseded here
+- [issue 137](../04-ISSUES/137-converging-a-machine-cut-off-its-own-guests/00-report.md),
+  [issue 141](../04-ISSUES/141-the-forward-chain-does-not-follow-the-modules/00-report.md)

02-DECISIONS/0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md

@@ -0,0 +1,171 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-29
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0005-the-node-host.md
+---
+
+# 141. The host delivers its own successor, and versions live side by side
+
+## Context
+
+[Issue 142](../04-ISSUES/142-the-host-is-the-one-thing-the-mesh-does-not-deliver/00-report.md). A
+merge builds every changed module and the control plane — which is itself a module — and the result
+reaches the machines running it with nobody asking. The host is the exception: it is not a build
+target, no declaration delivers it, and every machine in this mesh runs a byte-identical binary that
+somebody built on a workstation and copied out.
+
+The half that *recovers* from a bad host exists. `internal/upgrade` can tell that the executable this
+process started from was replaced on disk, and it records which version last completed a reconcile.
+The launcher counts consecutive failed starts, calls a rollback at the limit, and treats a clean exit
+as the host standing aside so that the next loop runs whatever is on disk now. That supervision is
+complete and correct.
+
+Two things make it dead code:
+
+- **`Replaced()` is called by nothing but its own tests.** Nothing tells the running host that a
+  successor is waiting.
+- **The rollback resolves a version through the machine's package manager** — `pacman -U` from the
+  package cache. No machine here has the host installed as a package, so the recovery cannot run on
+  any of them; and being written in one package manager's terms, it cannot run on two of the three
+  operating systems the host is built for — [ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md) builds one binary per
+  operating system, pinned at link time.
+
+**The record already points at the answer.** What is kept is a *version*, not a path. Keeping a
+version is only useful to something that can choose between versions present on the machine, which is
+what the package manager was being asked to do. The versions can simply be on disk.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **Deliver the host as a package, as the rollback assumes.** Rejected: it needs a package built and
+   a repository trusted per operating system, three of each, and the existing `package` resource
+   asserts presence and deliberately never a version — "version is the package manager's business and
+   the mesh does not hold a second opinion about it" — so it cannot ask for a particular host anyway.
+   Heaviest of the three and the only one that is different on every machine.
+2. **Write the new binary over the running one.** Rejected on a fact: a running executable cannot be
+   truncated, and `archive` opens what it unpacks with `O_TRUNC`. It could be made to write and
+   rename, which is better hygiene and worth doing for its own sake, but it buys nothing here that
+   option 3 does not, and it leaves rollback with nowhere to go back to.
+3. **Versions side by side; the newest retires the old.** Adopted.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A host version is delivered as an archive into a directory named for it, and never over a running
+one.** The declaration names it like any other archive — fetched by digest, the digest checked before
+anything is unpacked. Nothing new travels, no new resource kind, and no change to how archives are
+applied, because the path being written is not the path being executed.
+
+**The launcher starts the most recently delivered version.** That is what "the newest" means: the
+version whose directory arrived last. It reads no pointer and follows no link — the mesh creates no
+links ([ADR 0012](0012-the-mesh-creates-no-symlinks.md)) — and the version is in the path, so nothing
+has to be told what is running.
+
+**The running host stands aside for a successor, and only between reconciles.** Finding a newer
+version delivered, it finishes the reconcile it is in and exits cleanly. The launcher already reads a
+clean exit as exactly this and starts what is on disk now. A host that stood aside mid-apply is the
+half-configured machine this project exists to prevent, so the check happens at the boundary and
+nowhere else.
+
+**A version that completes a reconcile records itself, and retires what came before it.** The
+known-good record is written as it is today. Then versions older than the one before the running one
+are removed: the running version and its predecessor are kept, which is exactly what a rollback
+needs, and nothing else accumulates.
+
+**Rollback starts the previous version instead of reinstalling a package.** At the failure limit the
+launcher pins the known-good version and starts that, once. The second failure is still a different
+diagnosis — the previously working version does not run either, so it is the machine and not the
+binary — and the halt is unchanged. No package manager, no package cache, and the same script on every
+operating system.
+
+**A machine says which host version it is running,** on the report it already sends, beside the other
+facts it states about itself. Without it nothing can say a machine is behind, so "every machine
+current with its source" cannot include the host.
+
+## Progressive insight — 2026-09-29, the same day
+
+**The delivery is not "nothing new", and this record said it was.** The decision above stands and is
+built: versions side by side, the newest runs, the running host stands aside between reconciles, a
+completed reconcile retires what is older than the predecessor, rollback picks a directory. What was
+wrong was a claim about how a version reaches a machine. The paragraph on delivery said the
+declaration "names it like any other archive… nothing new travels, no new resource kind"; the second
+half is true and the first is not, because two things the delivery needs do not exist:
+
+- **Nothing can compile it.** A `bundle` artifact is compiled by a closed list of toolchains —
+  typescript and python — whose own comment says adding a language is a decision, because a language
+  used by *modules* needs an SDK carrying the broker client, the event envelope and tool serving. The
+  host uses none of that: it is what applies modules, not one of them. So the obligation that list
+  warns about attaches to a module written in a language, not to the language being buildable, and
+  the control plane — also written in Go — is built as an image from a Dockerfile rather than through
+  a toolchain at all.
+- **A version cannot reach the path.** An `archive` resource names a fixed path in the manifest, and
+  nothing interpolates the built version into it, so nothing can ask for
+  `…/versions/<version>/`.
+
+Neither changes what was decided, which options were weighed, or any consequence: the shape is
+unaffected and the host half is merged and tested. What it changes is the cost, which this record
+understated as none. The remaining work is a way to build the host and a way to name a version in a
+path, and until both exist nothing delivers a version and every machine takes the fallback — which is
+what every machine does today.
+
+> **Progressive insight — 2026-09-30. Both of those exist now.** The paragraph above named two missing
+> things and they are built: a Go toolchain, based on a new `mesh-tools-go` module so the compiler is
+> named and not pinned, and `${version}` in any value of a resource that uses an archive or a bundle.
+> The mesh compiles its own host and publishes it to its own registry, measured — a statically linked
+> stripped binary, fetched back out and run. **The cost was larger again than this note said**: three
+> more things in the path assumed one language or one shape, and a fourth was in the base image.
+> The account is [issue 142](../04-ISSUES/142-the-host-is-the-one-thing-the-mesh-does-not-deliver/01-progress.md).
+>
+> The version in a path is the artifact's **digest**, not the commit this note's own wording would
+> suggest. Two builds of one commit are meant to be the same bytes, so a content-addressed version
+> means an unchanged build keeps the path it had; a commit-named one would move for an identical binary
+> and recreate everything reading it.
+>
+> **Still nothing delivers a version to a machine.** The host is a module and builds, and declares no
+> resources, so the bundle sits in the registry and no machine is asked to take it. That is the next
+> piece, and the decision above is unchanged by any of this.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **The host becomes a build target and a module** — a module whose resource is the next host, applied
+  by the host that is running. The bootstrap is not circular because the two are different versions in
+  different directories.
+- **Rollback becomes usable on every machine**, having been usable on none. It also stops being
+  written in one operating system's terms.
+- **One copy by hand remains, once.** The first host that understands versioned directories cannot be
+  fetched by a host that does not. That copy is the last, and it is the honest cost of the change
+  rather than a step in the design.
+- **Two versions occupy disk instead of one.** About nine megabytes. The predecessor is the price of a
+  rollback that does not depend on a cache somebody else may clean.
+- **What got harder:** a host must now be able to find its own successor and to judge when it is safe
+  to stand aside. Both are between reconciles, which is the only moment the host is not mid-change.
+- **A machine that is never told a newer version keeps running what it has**, indefinitely and
+  visibly, because its report says which version that is.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+- **A delivered version is run, and the old one is not.** A bed delivers a second version to a machine
+  running the first; the host exits between reconciles, the launcher starts the new one, and the
+  machine reports the new version. This fails against the previous behaviour, where nothing notices a
+  delivered version at all.
+- **It stands aside between reconciles and never inside one.** Asserted by delivering a version while
+  an apply is in flight: the apply completes, and the exit follows it.
+- **A version that will not start is rolled back to its predecessor, once**, and the second failure
+  halts with the machine named rather than the binary — asserted with no package manager involved.
+- **A completed reconcile retires what is older than the predecessor**, and never the predecessor
+  itself, because that is what a rollback needs. Asserted on the directory afterwards.
+- **The report names the running version**, asserted end to end rather than on the function that reads
+  it, since the point is that the control plane can tell a machine is behind.
+- **The launcher picks the newest delivered version** with no pointer file and no link, asserted by
+  delivering two and checking which runs.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md) — the host, and what its supervision is for
+- [ADR 0010](0010-delivery.md) — a declaration is owned resources; this adds no kind to it
+- [ADR 0012](0012-the-mesh-creates-no-symlinks.md) — why the version is in the path
+- [ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md), *it is built per operating system* — why a rollback written in
+  one package manager's terms was wrong for two of three
+- [issue 142](../04-ISSUES/142-the-host-is-the-one-thing-the-mesh-does-not-deliver/00-report.md) — the
+  measurement

02-DECISIONS/0142-the-mesh-delivers-its-own-components-as-binaries.md

@@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-29
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md
+---
+
+# 142. The mesh delivers its own components as binaries, not as container images
+
+## Context
+
+Measured on the control-node, 2026-09-29:
+
+| what | how it runs | publishes |
+|---|---|---|
+| host | a binary on the machine | — |
+| controller, catalogue, builder, vault | containers | nothing |
+| store, registry, broker | containers | ports |
+
+**The mesh's own software is delivered two ways, and the difference is not a property of the
+software.** The host and the controller are both written in the same language, both the mesh's own,
+both doing the mesh's own work. One is an image fetched from a registry. The other is a file somebody
+copied to four machines, owned by no package, built by nothing
+([issue 142](../04-ISSUES/142-the-host-is-the-one-thing-the-mesh-does-not-deliver/00-report.md)).
+
+**The reason is not a judgement about either, it is that images are the only delivery that works.**
+There is no way to put a binary on a machine. The host is hand-copied because of that, and the
+controller is an image because of that. Neither was chosen on its merits.
+
+What it costs, all of it measured rather than argued:
+
+- **Genesis must raise a container runtime before the control plane can exist.** The bundle carries
+  three images and one of them is the controller, *"in the bundle for the same reason they are: there
+  is nothing to fetch it with yet"*
+  ([design 07](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/07-the-foundation.md)). So the hardest moment in the mesh's life
+  has a prerequisite that the thing being started does not need.
+- **Updating the control plane depends on the control plane.** Its image is fetched from the registry,
+  which is a container the controller manages.
+- **A change to the host cannot be rolled out at all.** Every machine here runs a byte-identical
+  hand-copied binary. A change merged yesterday reached none of them.
+- **Compiling the language the mesh is written in is not a capability of the builder.** The bundle
+  toolchains are typescript — real, with a registered base module — and python, which is named in the
+  list and absent from the catalogue. The controller is built as an image from a Dockerfile, which is
+  the per-repository incantation the bundle toolchain exists to abolish
+  ([design 18](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/18-building-a-module.md)).
+
+The half that *receives* a binary safely is already built and tested
+([ADR 0141](0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md)): versions side by side in directories named
+for them, the newest run, the running one standing aside between reconciles, retirement keeping the
+predecessor, and a rollback that chooses a directory. What is missing is everything that puts one
+there.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **Leave it as it is.** Rejected: it is not a design, it is the reach of one mechanism. And it is
+   what makes a host change undeliverable.
+2. **Containerise the host too**, so everything is delivered one way. Rejected: the host is what
+   starts the container runtime and what applies containers. A host in a container is the bootstrap
+   problem made total, and the machine would have no way back from a bad one.
+3. **Deliver the mesh's components as operating-system packages.** Rejected for the reason
+   [ADR 0141](0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md) rejected it for the host: a package and a
+   trusted repository per operating system, three of each, and the `package` resource asserts presence
+   and deliberately never a version.
+4. **Binaries for the mesh's own components, containers for third-party software.** Adopted.
+
+## Decision
+
+**The mesh's own components are delivered as binaries on the machine.** The host, the controller, the
+catalogue, the builder, the vault — the software this project writes. They are delivered by the
+mechanism [ADR 0141](0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md) built: an archive, fetched by
+digest, unpacked into a directory named for its version, with the running one standing aside between
+reconciles and a rollback that chooses the predecessor.
+
+**Third-party software stays a container.** The store, the registry, the broker. They are somebody
+else's build, they are already adopted as modules
+([ADR 0078](0078-the-store-and-broker-are-modules.md)), and an image is the right way to carry
+somebody else's software. **The container runtime remains required** — modules use it — so this
+removes a dependency from the control plane, not from the machine.
+
+**The builder compiles the languages the mesh is written in.** A toolchain for Go, with a base module
+providing the compiler, exactly as typescript has. The obligation the toolchain list warns about — an
+SDK carrying the broker client, the envelope and tool serving — attaches to a *module* written in a
+language, not to the language being compilable. None of these components is a module in that sense;
+the host is what applies modules.
+
+**An artifact says what it targets.** A compiled binary is per operating system, pinned at link time
+([ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md)), and a toolchain deliberately takes nothing from the module,
+because anything a module could override there it would be writing a Dockerfile to override. So the
+target is a property of the artifact rather than of the recipe, and one artifact declared per target
+is one build each.
+
+**A component's version comes from where it sits, not from its linker.** It is unpacked into a
+directory named for its version, so it can read its own version from its path. The stamp goes, and
+with it the need for a build to know what it will be called.
+
+**Genesis carries a binary reference where it carried an image reference.** The principle does not
+change — the bundle names a thing by digest and the host fetches it, pinned because nothing can
+resolve a version when no mesh exists — and the container runtime stops being a prerequisite for the
+control plane. It stays a prerequisite for the store and the broker, which is where it belongs.
+
+**The order is staged, and each step stands alone.** Compiling Go; an artifact naming its target;
+delivering a binary; the host as the first component delivered; the controller, catalogue, builder and
+vault out of their containers; genesis last. Genesis is last for the reason it is always last: it
+matters for a machine nobody has yet, and every earlier step is provable on a mesh that exists.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **One delivery for the mesh's own software**, so a change to the host ships the way a change to the
+  controller does, and neither is copied by hand.
+- **The control plane stops depending on a container runtime and on its own registry.** Both remain on
+  the machine for other reasons; neither gates the control plane's own life any more.
+- **`Replaced()`, the known-good record and the launcher's rollback stop being dead code.** They were
+  written for this and have been called by nothing but their tests.
+- **Four more components gain a rollback they do not have.** Today a bad controller image is recovered
+  by an operator; under this it is recovered the way a bad host is.
+- **Two versions of each component occupy disk.** Around nine megabytes each. The predecessor is what a
+  rollback needs.
+- **Genesis gets smaller, not larger.** One fewer image to carry and one fewer runtime to raise before
+  the control plane.
+- **This does not make the components smaller or simpler.** They are the same programs; what changes is
+  how they arrive. A reader expecting the containers to have been hiding complexity will not find any.
+- **What got harder:** the builder gains a language, artifacts gain a target, and the mesh gains a
+  second kind of thing it must deliver correctly — one where getting it wrong takes the control plane
+  down rather than a module. That is why the host is first: it is the component whose recovery is
+  already built and tested.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+- **A component is delivered and runs, with nothing copied by hand.** A bed builds the host from its
+  repository, delivers it to a machine running an older one, and the machine reports the new version.
+  This fails today at the first step, because nothing builds it.
+- **Each target is built once and only the matching one is delivered.** Asserted by declaring an
+  artifact per operating system and checking that a machine is offered the one it can run — a host
+  built for another is what ADR 0005's link-time pin exists to refuse.
+- **A component reads its version from its path**, asserted by unpacking the same bytes into two
+  differently named directories and seeing each report its own.
+- **A bad component is rolled back without an operator**, for the host first: a version that will not
+  start is replaced by its predecessor once, and the second failure halts naming the machine.
+- **The control plane comes up with no registry reachable**, which is the dependency this removes —
+  asserted by raising it with the registry stopped.
+- **Genesis raises a control plane with no container runtime running**, and raises the store and the
+  broker afterwards. Last, and on a machine with nothing on it.
+- **A published port count that does not change.** The mesh's own components publish nothing today, so
+  moving them out of containers must not open anything — asserted on the machine's reachable set before
+  and after, which the converge preview already reads.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0141](0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md) — the receiving half, already built
+- [ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md) — the host, its supervision, and one binary per operating system
+- [ADR 0078](0078-the-store-and-broker-are-modules.md) — why third-party software stays a container
+- [ADR 0006](0006-the-substrate-and-the-control-plane.md) — what genesis must raise, and in what order
+- [issue 142](../04-ISSUES/142-the-host-is-the-one-thing-the-mesh-does-not-deliver/00-report.md) — the
+  measurement that started this
+- [design 07](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/07-the-foundation.md) — the bundle's three images, one of them the
+  controller

02-DECISIONS/0143-a-consumer-verifies-the-grant-it-is-given.md

@@ -0,0 +1,135 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: superseded
+date: 2026-09-29
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0010-delivery.md
+superseded-by: 02-DECISIONS/0144-anything-on-a-machine-may-call-anything-on-it.md
+---
+
+# 143. A consumer verifies the grant it is given
+
+## Context
+
+A **grant** is what the mesh writes on a consumer's machine so it can reach a provider. The real one
+the forge receives for its database, as it arrives:
+
+```
+provision  postgres-database
+at         <the provider's machine, by name>
+port       the machine port the provider is published on
+as         the role the provider created for this consumer
+```
+
+with the credential sealed in a separate file. Four facts and a password, and they are the whole
+mechanism by which anything in the mesh reaches anything else.
+
+**The mesh asserts that claim and never finds out whether it is true.**
+[Issue 145](../04-ISSUES/145-a-machine-reads-healthy-while-its-modules-cannot-reach-each-other/00-report.md):
+converging a machine dropped the path from a container to a port on its own machine, and for eleven
+hours the mesh answered *all doing what they were told, all heard from, every module current with its
+source* while a web application logged, six thousand times:
+
+```
+connection to server at "<the machine>" (10.10.0.1), port 6852 failed: timeout expired
+```
+
+Every check the mesh makes passed, because every check it makes is about the relationship between the
+mesh and a machine: the declaration was applied, the digest matched, every container named was running.
+None of them asks whether a consumer can reach what it requires — though the mesh composed the grant
+and therefore knows the consumer, the machine, the address, the port and the credential.
+
+**And where the check runs decides whether it catches anything.** The rule in force admitted the
+machines' own addresses on the private network. A dial from the *machine* to its own address carries
+exactly such a source address, so a check run by the host on its own behalf would have matched that rule
+and passed — while every container on the machine was refused. This is inference from the rule that was
+loaded, not a measurement: the fault was found and fixed before anyone thought to dial from the host.
+It is enough to decide the question, because a check whose position differs from the consumer's is
+testing something nobody asked about.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **The control plane dials each provision.** Rejected, and it is the tempting one because the control
+   plane holds every fact. It sits on the provider's machine for most provisions here and reaches the
+   address by a path no consumer uses; in the measured outage it would have passed throughout.
+2. **The host dials on the consumer's behalf, from the machine.** Rejected for the reason above: the
+   machine's network position is not the consumer's, and the one outage this exists to catch is exactly
+   a difference between them.
+3. **Ask the module.** Rejected: a module is arbitrary software that the mesh does not write. Some could
+   report on their provisions and most cannot, and a check that covers the modules that opted in tells
+   nobody anything about the rest.
+4. **Read the module's logs.** Rejected: the failure was in a log the whole time, and reading a module's
+   logs makes the mesh depend on the wording of software it does not control.
+5. **The consumer verifies it, from its own network position.** Adopted.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A consumer verifies each grant it is given, from its own network position.** After a reconcile has
+applied a grant, the machine opens a connection to the address and port that grant names, from inside
+the consumer's own network namespace — the same position the consumer's software dials from, which is
+the only position that answers the question the grant asks.
+
+**It is a connection, not a conversation.** Whether the port accepts a connection is what a grant
+claims; whether the credential is right, the role exists or the schema is current is the provider's to
+answer and the consumer's to discover. A check that spoke each provision's protocol would be a second
+implementation of every provision, and would fail for reasons that are not the mesh's.
+
+**One failure is not news.** A provider restarting is ordinary, and so is a consumer between containers.
+A grant is reported unreachable only after it has failed on **consecutive** reconciles, and the count is
+what the machine reports rather than the last attempt — so a reader can tell "it was briefly away" from
+"it has never worked".
+
+**A grant that cannot be checked is said to be unchecked, never assumed good.** A consumer that is not
+running has no network position to dial from; that is not a broken grant and must not read as one. It is
+also not a verified grant, and the two are different sentences.
+
+**What it costs to be wrong is the constraint on all of it.** A check that reports a working provision
+broken trains a reader to ignore the report, which is worse than having none — the fault this
+repository keeps finding, one level up. So the threshold is consecutive failures, the check is the
+cheapest thing that answers the question, and an unknown is reported as unknown.
+
+**The mesh says it where it says everything else.** A machine's report carries its unreachable grants,
+and `status` names them beside what is out of date — so "every module current with its source" stops
+being the whole of what the mesh will tell you about a machine whose modules cannot reach each other.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **The mesh can be wrong out loud.** It has been able to assert a grant and not check it; now a grant
+  that does not work is a thing the mesh says, and the eleven hours of issue 145 become minutes.
+- **The host gains the ability to act from a container's network position**, which it has not needed
+  before. That is a real capability and the only one this needs.
+- **A machine reports something that is not about the declaration.** Everything it reports today is
+  what it applied and what it holds; this is the first thing it says about whether what it applied
+  works.
+- **A provision with no port is not checked**, because there is nothing to dial. Several are files and
+  secrets, and saying "checked" about those would be the appearance of verification that this record
+  exists to remove.
+- **What got harder:** a reconcile does more than apply. Every grant adds a connection attempt on a
+  cadence, which is cheap individually and worth naming: a machine with many consumers dials once per
+  grant per reconcile.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+- **The outage is caught.** A bed drops the path from a consumer's network position to a provider's
+  port while leaving the machine's own path to it open — the exact shape of issue 145 — and the grant
+  reads unreachable. This fails against the previous behaviour, where nothing reported anything, and
+  against a check run from the machine, which passes while the consumer cannot reach it.
+- **A restarting provider is not an outage.** One failed reconcile reports nothing; the count rises and
+  falls, and the grant reads reachable again without anybody acting.
+- **A consumer that is not running reads unchecked, not broken**, asserted separately from the
+  unreachable case because they are different sentences.
+- **A provision with no port is not claimed to be checked.**
+- **The report carries the count, not the last attempt**, so "briefly away" and "never worked" are
+  distinguishable by a reader who sees only the report.
+- **`status` names an unreachable grant**, asserted on the output, since a check nothing surfaces is
+  the same as no check.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0010](0010-delivery.md) — the declaration is owned resources; a grant is one of them
+- [ADR 0009](0009-modules-and-the-graph.md) — what a provision and a consumer are
+- [issue 145](../04-ISSUES/145-a-machine-reads-healthy-while-its-modules-cannot-reach-each-other/00-report.md)
+  — the eleven hours
+- [issue 136](../04-ISSUES/136-a-module-may-name-a-program-the-machine-does-not-have/00-report.md) — the
+  same distance between a declaration and a machine, one level down

02-DECISIONS/0144-anything-on-a-machine-may-call-anything-on-it.md

@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-29
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0045-a-machine-firewall-is-the-sum-of-what-it-listens-on.md
+supersedes: 02-DECISIONS/0143-a-consumer-verifies-the-grant-it-is-given.md
+---
+
+# 144. Anything on a machine may call anything on it, and that is the whole of "local"
+
+## Context
+
+Everything in the mesh should be able to call:
+
+- what runs on the same machine;
+- another machine's service over the private network, if that service is exposed there;
+- another machine's service over the public network, if it is exposed there.
+
+Three cases. The filter had two of them.
+
+**The first was broken and the break was invisible.** A service exposed to the private network rendered
+as the machines' own addresses on it. A caller on the machine carries such an address; a caller inside
+one of that machine's containers carries a bridge address and matched nothing. Measured:
+
+```
+the machine:   local 10.10.0.1 dev lo   src 10.10.0.1
+a container:   10.10.0.1 via 172.17.0.1 dev eth0  src 172.17.0.8
+```
+
+Same destination, same machine, two source addresses. The rule named the first and silently refused the
+second, so a module reaching its database on its own machine's name timed out for eleven hours
+([issue 145](../04-ISSUES/145-a-machine-reads-healthy-while-its-modules-cannot-reach-each-other/00-report.md)).
+
+**The second case works, and by accident.** A caller on another machine reaches the private network over
+the tunnel, and arrives carrying that machine's own address — so the rule matches. It would not have
+matched the caller's own address either; the tunnel rewrites it. That two of three cases worked is why
+this looked correct.
+
+**[ADR 0143](0143-a-consumer-verifies-the-grant-it-is-given.md) answered the wrong question.** Written
+hours earlier, it proposed that a consumer verify each grant it is given by opening a connection from
+its own network position — and it went to some length about *which* position, because whether a caller
+sat in a container changed the answer. That difference was the bug. A verification mechanism would have
+reported this outage sooner and would not have prevented it, and the machinery it needed existed only
+because the rule was wrong. The remedy for a configuration error is the correct configuration.
+
+**And a module is not a container.** A module is software that delivers one or more services, and it may
+do that as a container, an installed package with a unit, a binary, or files something else reads. Of 72
+modules in the catalogue, 61 happen to use a container and 11 do not — among them the resolver, the ssh
+daemon and the intrusion-prevention module. A rule that reasons about containers describes most of the
+mesh and not the mesh.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **A line per service admitting the machine's own callers.** Rejected: it is what was written first,
+   and it only ever covers the services somebody remembered to think about. It also states, service by
+   service, a thing that is true of the machine.
+2. **Verify each grant from the consumer's position** ([ADR 0143](0143-a-consumer-verifies-the-grant-it-is-given.md)).
+   Rejected as a remedy: it observes the fault rather than removing it, and the question it agonised over
+   — which network position — exists only while the fault does.
+3. **Enumerate the addresses a machine's callers may have.** Rejected for the reason no address is named
+   anywhere in this filter any more ([ADR 0140](0140-the-filter-constrains-what-arrives-from-outside.md)):
+   a range describes one machine and goes stale in silence.
+4. **Local is not filtered, stated once.** Adopted.
+
+## Decision
+
+**Anything on a machine may call anything on that machine, and the filter says so once.** Not per
+service, not per port, and not by naming who the callers are: traffic that did not arrive from outside
+the machine and did not arrive over the private network is the machine's own, and is admitted. It is
+asked by the link the traffic arrived on, because that is a fact about the machine rather than a list
+that describes one.
+
+**Local is not a boundary this mesh draws.** Whether a caller is a container, a unit, or the operator's
+shell changes nothing, because the thing being decided is "is this the same machine" and the answer does
+not depend on the form the caller takes.
+
+**The other two cases are unchanged and are now legible beside it.** A service exposed to the private
+network admits the machines on it; a service exposed publicly admits anything. Three cases, three lines,
+and a reader can see all three at once.
+
+**[ADR 0143](0143-a-consumer-verifies-the-grant-it-is-given.md) is superseded and nothing replaces it.**
+Whether the mesh should check that a grant works is a real question — it reported this machine healthy
+for eleven hours — but it is a question about what the mesh can say, not about what it should do, and it
+must stand on its own rather than as the remedy for a rule that was wrong. It is not built.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **The three things everything should be able to call are three lines**, and the first is one line
+  rather than one per service, so a service added tomorrow is reachable locally without anybody
+  remembering to say so.
+- **A form of module stops mattering to the filter.** The 11 modules that are not containers were never
+  affected by this bug and were never the reason it was hard to see; they are the reason the rule should
+  never have mentioned containers.
+- **The mesh still cannot say when a grant stops working.** That is the live gap, recorded in issue 145
+  and no longer pretending to have an answer.
+- **What got harder:** nothing. This removes a line per service and replaces it with one.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+- **A caller on the machine reaches a service on it, in the input chain**, asserted on that chain's own
+  body — because the forward chain carries the same line in the same words, and an assertion on the
+  whole rendered file passed with the input chain's copy deleted. That is what
+  [ADR 0137](0137-a-machine-says-which-networks-it-routes.md)'s tests already say to do.
+- **It is one rule, not one per service.** Asserted by rendering two services of different reach and
+  refusing a per-port local line.
+- **The three reaches render as three lines**, asserted together, so the whole of what the filter says
+  about who may call what is one test.
+- **The measured case:** from a container on the machine, a service exposed to the private network on
+  that machine answers. This is the outage, and it fails against the rule this replaces.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0045](0045-a-machine-firewall-is-the-sum-of-what-it-listens-on.md) — the filter is the sum
+  of what its modules listen on
+- [ADR 0140](0140-the-filter-constrains-what-arrives-from-outside.md) — why no address is named
+- [ADR 0138](0138-an-assignment-binds-an-endpoint-and-says-how-far-it-reaches.md) — internal and public,
+  the other two cases
+- [ADR 0143](0143-a-consumer-verifies-the-grant-it-is-given.md) — superseded here
+- [issue 145](../04-ISSUES/145-a-machine-reads-healthy-while-its-modules-cannot-reach-each-other/00-report.md)

02-DECISIONS/0145-a-module-checks-what-the-mesh-claims-is-reachable.md

@@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: superseded
+date: 2026-09-29
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0144-anything-on-a-machine-may-call-anything-on-it.md
+superseded-by: 02-DECISIONS/0146-connectivity-is-checked-by-name-per-hosting-form.md
+---
+
+# 145. A module checks what the mesh claims is reachable, and it checks itself
+
+## Context
+
+The mesh asserts three things are callable ([ADR 0144](0144-anything-on-a-machine-may-call-anything-on-it.md)):
+what runs on the same machine, another machine's service exposed to the private network, and another
+machine's service exposed publicly. It has never checked any of them.
+
+[Issue 145](../04-ISSUES/145-a-machine-reads-healthy-while-its-modules-cannot-reach-each-other/00-report.md):
+the first of the three was broken for eleven hours and the mesh answered *all heard from, every module
+current with its source* throughout. Every check it makes is about the relationship between the mesh and
+a machine — applied, current, containers running — and none about whether anything can reach anything.
+
+**A first answer was drafted and withdrawn.** [ADR 0143](0143-a-consumer-verifies-the-grant-it-is-given.md)
+put the check inside the host, verifying each grant from the consumer's network position. It was
+superseded because the difference it worked so hard to reproduce — whether a caller sat in a container —
+was the bug itself. What survives from it is the part that was right: a check run from the wrong place
+proves nothing, and the mesh's own reports are not evidence about the network.
+
+**The mesh already has the shape for this and it is a module.** A module can declare a container that
+runs on a cadence ([ADR 0053](0053-a-step-that-runs-on-a-schedule.md), and three modules already use
+`*/5 * * * *`), can be given the mesh's roster as a rendered fact — every machine's name, address and
+this node's own identity, the same mechanism the resolver and the operator's ssh configuration use — and
+can emit what it found on the bus. Nothing new is needed to build this except the module.
+
+**What it must not check is the trap.** The obvious probe target is ssh: present on every machine, never
+closed by design. Dialling it would have passed throughout the outage, because ssh is admitted
+unconditionally and the thing that broke was a service exposed to the private network. A checker whose
+probe is unconditionally open measures the one path that cannot fail, which is the failure this whole
+sequence keeps producing — a check that reads as verification and verifies nothing.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **The host verifies each grant** ([ADR 0143](0143-a-consumer-verifies-the-grant-it-is-given.md)).
+   Superseded. It needed the host to act from another network position, which is machinery that exists
+   only while local calls are filtered wrongly.
+2. **The control plane dials every node.** Rejected: it sits on one machine and reaches the others by a
+   path no ordinary caller uses. It would have passed throughout the outage.
+3. **Probe an existing service.** Rejected for the target problem above: the services guaranteed on every
+   machine are the ones that are never closed, so they cannot fail the way the mesh fails.
+4. **A module on every machine that serves its own probe and dials the others'.** Adopted.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A module runs on every machine, serves an endpoint of its own, and dials every other machine's.** The
+probe is the module's own endpoint, declared reachable over the private network — so the thing being
+dialled is admitted by exactly the rule that governs every other internally-exposed service, and fails
+when that rule is wrong. A second endpoint, declared public, does the same for the public path where a
+machine has one.
+
+**It checks the three cases the mesh claims, by name:**
+
+- its **own machine**, by dialling its own machine's address — the case that broke, and the only one that
+  distinguishes a caller on the machine from a caller in one of its containers;
+- **each other machine over the private network**;
+- **each machine's public path**, where one is recorded.
+
+**It resolves before it dials, and says which failed.** A name that does not resolve and a port that does
+not answer are different faults with different owners, and a checker that reports one sentence for both
+sends a reader to the wrong place.
+
+**It runs where the callers run.** The module's own code in its own container, on the cadence the mesh
+already has, from the same position as every other module on that machine. It is not the host and not the
+control plane, and that is the whole point.
+
+**It says what it found and nothing else.** It emits results; it repairs nothing, opens nothing and holds
+no credential beyond its own. A checker that fixes things is a second control plane.
+
+**One failure is not a fault.** A machine rebooting is ordinary. A path is reported broken after it has
+failed on consecutive runs, and the count travels with the result so a reader can tell "briefly away"
+from "never worked" — the one thing [ADR 0143](0143-a-consumer-verifies-the-grant-it-is-given.md) got
+right and worth keeping.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **The mesh gains the ability to be wrong out loud about the network.** Eleven hours becomes two runs.
+- **It is a module, so it is assigned, built, pushed and reported on like everything else** — no new host
+  capability, no new vocabulary, nothing in the control plane that has to know about checking.
+- **Its own endpoint is the instrument.** That is what makes it able to fail; it also means the checker
+  must be assigned to a machine before that machine can be checked, and a machine without it is
+  unchecked rather than healthy.
+- **It cannot check what it cannot be told.** The roster gives it machines; it does not give it every
+  module's endpoints, so this checks the paths the mesh claims and not every grant in the mesh. That is
+  the honest scope of a first one, and the difference is worth saying rather than growing quietly.
+- **What got harder:** one more module on every machine, and a module whose whole purpose is to fail
+  visibly when something else is wrong. Its own failures will be read as the mesh's, which is the cost of
+  an instrument.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+- **It catches the measured outage.** A bed closes the path from a container to a service exposed to the
+  private network on its own machine — issue 145's shape — and the checker reports its own machine
+  unreachable while every other path still reads reachable. This fails against a probe on a port that is
+  never closed, which is the wrong target this record exists to name.
+- **A machine rebooting is not a fault**: one failed run reports nothing, the count rises and falls.
+- **A name that does not resolve is reported as that**, not as a port that did not answer.
+- **It reports and does not act**: asserted by giving it a broken path and checking nothing on the machine
+  changed.
+- **A machine without the module reads unchecked**, never healthy — asserted on what the mesh says about
+  a machine it is not assigned to.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0144](0144-anything-on-a-machine-may-call-anything-on-it.md) — the three things that must be callable
+- [ADR 0143](0143-a-consumer-verifies-the-grant-it-is-given.md) — superseded; what survives is that the
+  position matters
+- [ADR 0053](0053-a-step-that-runs-on-a-schedule.md) — the cadence
+- [ADR 0138](0138-an-assignment-binds-an-endpoint-and-says-how-far-it-reaches.md) — internal and public,
+  which the probe endpoints declare
+- [issue 145](../04-ISSUES/145-a-machine-reads-healthy-while-its-modules-cannot-reach-each-other/00-report.md)

02-DECISIONS/0146-connectivity-is-checked-by-name-per-hosting-form.md

@@ -0,0 +1,125 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-29
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0145-a-module-checks-what-the-mesh-claims-is-reachable.md
+supersedes: 02-DECISIONS/0145-a-module-checks-what-the-mesh-claims-is-reachable.md
+---
+
+# 146. Connectivity is checked by name, per hosting form, with a valid certificate
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0145](0145-a-module-checks-what-the-mesh-claims-is-reachable.md) decided that a module checks what
+the mesh claims is reachable, from where the callers are, because the mesh reported four machines healthy
+for eleven hours while a module could not reach its database
+([issue 145](../04-ISSUES/145-a-machine-reads-healthy-while-its-modules-cannot-reach-each-other/00-report.md)).
+That decision stands. What it got wrong is everything about *what* is dialled.
+
+It dialled a raw port on each machine's address. Three things are wrong with that:
+
+- **A raw port is not how anything in this mesh is reached.** A real caller resolves a name, the proxy
+  answers it, and the proxy reaches the service. A check that dials a port tests the last hop of a path
+  with four hops in it, and the three it skips — resolution, the proxy, the certificate — are where most
+  of the mesh's connectivity actually lives.
+- **It tested one hosting form.** A module is software that delivers services, and it may deliver them
+  from a container, from a unit the mesh writes for its own code, or from a unit a package ships. Those
+  are three different paths to the same machine, and the outage that produced this was two of them
+  disagreeing. A probe served one way measures one way.
+- **It said nothing about certificates.** An internal name that resolves, routes and answers over TLS
+  that nothing can verify is not a working path; it is a working path for whoever holds the proxy's
+  trust and nobody else.
+
+## Decision
+
+**Each hosting form gets its own endpoint, its own route and therefore its own name.** On every machine:
+
+| name | what serves it |
+|---|---|
+| `connect-docker.<node>.internal` | a container |
+| `connect-process.<node>.internal` | the mesh's own code, in a unit the mesh writes |
+| `connect-unit.<node>.internal` | a unit a package ships |
+
+and the same set under each machine's public domain where it has one — `connect-docker.<domain>` and its
+siblings. The names are the instrument: a failure reads as *`connect-docker.g14.internal` did not answer*,
+which says which machine and which hosting form without anybody interpreting anything.
+
+**Every machine checks every machine, by name, over TLS, verifying the certificate.** Not a port, not an
+address: resolve the name, connect, complete the handshake, check the certificate against the authority
+that should have issued it — the mesh's own for an internal name, a public one for a public name. That is
+the whole path a real caller takes, and each step failing is reported as itself.
+
+**No name is written anywhere.** The machines come from the roster the mesh already renders as a fact, and
+the labels are the module's. A machine that joins appears in every other machine's roster on the next
+push, and they begin checking it without an edit.
+
+**And the module arrives on a machine because the machine exists, not because somebody assigned it.** A
+machine that joins and does not have it is worse than unchecked: every other machine is already dialling
+its names, so it reads as broken everywhere until someone notices. This is the part the mesh cannot
+currently express — see below — and it is the part that makes the rest safe.
+
+**What survives from 0145**, unchanged: it reports and repairs nothing; one failure is not a fault and a
+path is broken after consecutive runs with the count travelling with the result; findings are said on the
+bus, because a finding in a file on the machine is what this exists to end; and the bus is the one path
+that cannot report its own failure, so an emit that does not land is written locally and nowhere else.
+
+## What this needs that the mesh does not have
+
+Named here rather than assumed, because each is a decision of its own and this record is not the place to
+make them:
+
+1. **A module that every machine has.** `ScopeNode` means *at most one holder per node* — an exclusivity
+   rule, not an obligation — and nothing assigns a module at enrolment. Today the resolver, the packet
+   filter, ssh and intrusion prevention are each assigned per machine by hand, which is the same gap
+   wearing different clothes.
+2. **A container running a module's own bundle.** A `process` runs the mesh's own compiled code with no
+   image; a `container` needs an image of the module's own, which means a Dockerfile — the thing the
+   `bundle` artifact exists to abolish. Nothing in the catalogue runs a bundle in a container, so
+   `connect-docker` has no shape yet.
+3. **A unit a package ships, for `connect-unit`.** The `service` resource puts an existing unit into a
+   state and deliberately installs none, so this form needs a package that serves a port — and naming a
+   program the machine may not have is
+   [issue 136](../04-ISSUES/136-a-module-may-name-a-program-the-machine-does-not-have/00-report.md).
+4. **A machine's public domain in the roster fact.** The fact carries each machine's name, mesh name,
+   address and operator account. The public names cannot be composed without the domain.
+5. **Something that installs the mesh's own root on a machine.** This is
+   [issue 129](../04-ISSUES/129-nothing-makes-a-machine-trust-the-meshs-authority/00-report.md), open
+   since before any of this. Until it is closed, every internal name will fail certificate verification
+   from every machine — correctly, because nothing can verify it. That is the checker working, and it is
+   worth saying in advance so the first run is not read as the checker being broken.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **A failure names the machine and the hosting form.** That is the whole gain over a port: eleven hours
+  became two runs under 0145, and under this it also becomes one line that says where to look.
+- **The checker surfaces issue 129 immediately**, and will report every internal name unverifiable until
+  it is fixed. A reader must be told that before the first run rather than after.
+- **Five things must be built before this is what it says it is**, and until they are, what exists is a
+  port dial from one position — useful, and not this.
+- **What got harder:** a module with three hosting forms of the same trivial service is a strange thing to
+  read. It is justified only because those three forms are how the mesh actually runs software, and a
+  checker that tested one of them would keep the class of outage it exists to catch.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+- **A name per hosting form answers from every machine**, asserted by name and not by port.
+- **A certificate that does not verify is reported as that**, distinctly from a name that does not resolve
+  and a port that does not answer — three faults, three owners.
+- **A machine that joins is checked by every other machine without an edit**, asserted by adding one to a
+  bed and looking at what the others dial on their next run.
+- **A machine that joins has the module**, which is gap 1 above and is the assertion that cannot be
+  written yet.
+- **The measured outage is still caught**: the path from a container to a service on its own machine is
+  closed and `connect-docker.<that node>.internal` fails from that machine while the others still pass.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0145](0145-a-module-checks-what-the-mesh-claims-is-reachable.md) — superseded; its core stands
+- [ADR 0138](0138-an-assignment-binds-an-endpoint-and-says-how-far-it-reaches.md) — the two reaches these
+  names come from
+- [ADR 0066](0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md) — a label plus a domain, which is why no name is written
+- [issue 129](../04-ISSUES/129-nothing-makes-a-machine-trust-the-meshs-authority/00-report.md) — what the
+  internal names will fail on until it is closed
+- [issue 145](../04-ISSUES/145-a-machine-reads-healthy-while-its-modules-cannot-reach-each-other/00-report.md)

02-DECISIONS/0147-a-module-anchors-the-meshs-authority.md

@@ -0,0 +1,169 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-29
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0098-a-fact-a-provider-makes-at-first-start-is-fetched-from-it.md
+---
+
+# 147. A module anchors the mesh's authority on a machine, and takes it away again
+
+## Context
+
+The mesh runs its own certificate authority and every internal name is served with a certificate
+from it. No machine trusts it. On an enrolled, adopted workstation — on the private network,
+resolving through the mesh's resolver — every internal HTTPS name fails verification with
+*unable to get local issuer certificate*
+([issue 129](../04-ISSUES/129-nothing-makes-a-machine-trust-the-meshs-authority/00-report.md)).
+The certificates are genuine; nothing on the machine has ever been told what issued them.
+
+The authority's only consumer today is a proxy, which fetches the root into a directory of its own
+and hands it to one program ([ADR 0098](0098-a-fact-a-provider-makes-at-first-start-is-fetched-from-it.md)).
+That is enough for the proxy and for nothing else: a browser, `git` over HTTPS, `curl`, a package
+manager and every module that calls another module by an internal name read the machine's trust
+store, which holds the predecessor's authority and a developer tool's local root, and nothing of
+the mesh's.
+
+The predecessor wrote its root into every machine it set up. Removing it was deliberate — an
+honest failure beats a name that verifies for the wrong reason — and it leaves the mesh with no
+answer at all until this one lands. It is also what keeps the predecessor alive on the machines
+that still speak TLS to a mesh name.
+
+**What makes this a decision rather than a patch** is where the knowledge goes. Two mechanisms in
+the mesh already write things onto a machine because it is on the private network: `/etc/hosts`
+and the registry's plaintext trust ([ADR 0082](0082-the-registry-is-reached-by-name-and-trusted-by-the-overlay.md)).
+Following that precedent, the controller would inject an anchor into every such machine's
+declaration, and issue 129 proposed exactly that. It would work. It would also put *where this
+operating system keeps trust anchors* and *which command refreshes its bundles* into the control
+plane, for a fact the control plane does not have (the root does not exist until the authority has
+run) and a machine that may have no reason to verify a mesh name at all.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **The controller injects the anchor into every machine on the private network**, the
+   `/etc/hosts` and insecure-registry shape. Rejected: being on the network is what makes the
+   registry reachable, and that is why network presence is the right trigger *there* — the trust
+   and the reachability are the same fact. Trusting an authority is not the same fact as being
+   able to reach it, and the anchor's path and the bundle refresh are a property of the machine's
+   operating system, which is the host's half of the mesh, not the controller's.
+2. **A new host primitive — a `trust-anchor` resource type.** Rejected for now, not on principle.
+   The host's vocabulary should grow when a shape cannot be said with what exists, and this one
+   can: a file and a service already express it, as the packet filter proves
+   ([ADR 0140](0140-the-filter-constrains-what-arrives-from-outside.md), whose module writes a
+   unit file and a service and nothing else). The primitive becomes right the moment a second
+   operating system is in play, because the anchor directory and the refresh command are exactly
+   the difference `internal/system` exists to hold. Until then it would be a vocabulary word with
+   one speaker.
+3. **A module that requires the authority, fetches its root, installs it as an anchor and
+   refreshes the machine's bundles — and removes both when it is no longer assigned.** Adopted.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A machine trusts the mesh's authority because a module put its root there, and stops trusting it
+when that module is taken away.**
+
+1. **The module requires `internal-acme-ca`** and reads the provider's bound address and the path
+   it serves its root at. It requires nothing else and provides nothing: it is a consumer of the
+   authority like any other.
+2. **It fetches the root over the mesh's own network, without prior trust**, because there is no
+   prior trust to have — this is the module that establishes it — and the network is what
+   authenticates the fetch ([ADR 0098](0098-a-fact-a-provider-makes-at-first-start-is-fetched-from-it.md),
+   the same reasoning that lets the proxy fetch it). What it accepts is checked: a body that is
+   not a certificate fails, and the failure is the module's, not a later handshake's.
+3. **It installs the root where this machine's TLS clients look, and refreshes the extracted
+   bundles** — the command that does the refresh is an ordinary part of the unit that places the
+   anchor, not a new thing the mesh can be asked to do.
+4. **Removal is symmetric and is the same unit's business.** Undeclared, the host stops the unit;
+   stopping it removes the anchor and refreshes the bundles again. A machine that leaves the mesh
+   stops trusting the mesh, without anybody remembering to go and look.
+5. **It is an ordinary assignment.** No machine is given it automatically. A machine that verifies
+   a mesh name is assigned it, and a machine that does not is not — which is the same statement
+   the mesh already makes about every other module, and is why this is not the controller's
+   business.
+
+**One operating system, said out loud.** The anchor directory and the refresh command in the
+module today are Arch's. On a machine that is not Arch the unit fails, visibly, rather than
+writing a file nothing reads. That is the accurate failure, and it is the signal that option 2
+above has become right.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+- **The verification that could not succeed before.** On a machine holding the module, a plain
+  client fetches an internal HTTPS name with no `-k` and no bundle argument and verifies. On a
+  machine without it, the same fetch fails with *unable to get local issuer certificate*. Both
+  halves, because only the pair distinguishes "the anchor works" from "something else already
+  trusted it".
+- **The removal half, in the same bed:** unassign the module, refetch, and the failure returns.
+  Checking only the arrival is how a trust store fills up with authorities nobody can account for.
+- **What is deliberately not checked here:** that the authority issues, that a name resolves, that
+  the proxy serves. Those have their own beds, and this module's bed passing for those reasons is
+  the failure mode this record is most exposed to — which is why the negative half is not optional.
+
+**What this bed is dialled at, and why it is the authority itself.** The authority serves its own
+API with a certificate it issued, so the handshake under test needs nothing else in the mesh to be
+right. A trust bed that reached for a routed name through the proxy would be passing or failing for
+the proxy's reasons and the resolver's.
+
+**Written, and not yet run** *(2026-09-29)*. The bed is `trust-anchor` in the lab, and it cannot
+execute: raising a foundation fails before any module is reached, in both bundles that exist
+([issue 146](../04-ISSUES/146-the-foundation-cannot-be-raised-on-the-bus-the-mesh-runs-on/00-report.md)).
+So what stands behind this record today is the rendering — the script the machine would run names
+the authority it was bound to, checked in the control plane's own test suite — and **not** a machine
+that verified anything. That is a weaker thing than the paragraph above describes, and it stays
+written this way until the bed runs.
+
+> **Progressive insight — 2026-09-30. It has now been run, on the live mesh rather than in the bed.**
+> The paragraph above said nothing had verified anything, and something has. The module was registered
+> from the catalogue, assigned to a workstation, and checked in the form this section prescribes — the
+> authority's own API, so the handshake needs nothing else in the mesh to be right:
+>
+> ```
+> $ curl -sS -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code}' https://<the authority>:9000/health
+> 200
+> subject=CN=Step Online CA
+> issuer=O=Mesh Internal CA, CN=Mesh Internal CA Intermediate CA
+> Verify return code: 0 (ok)
+> ```
+>
+> **Both halves.** Unassigning and pushing removed the anchor, emptied the trust store of the mesh's
+> authority, and returned the plain client to *unable to get local issuer certificate* — then assigning
+> again restored it. The negative half is what distinguishes the anchor working from something else
+> having trusted it, and it is the half nothing had ever exercised.
+>
+> **One thing this found that is not in the module.** The removal only works because the *host* removes
+> the service before the script: stopping the unit is what deletes the certificate and refreshes the
+> bundles, and it needs the script it calls to still exist. Nothing in the module states that ordering;
+> the symmetry this record claims rests on it.
+>
+> Run on the live mesh because that is where a change is verified now
+> ([ADR 0149](0149-the-live-mesh-is-the-test-bed.md)), and the bed still cannot raise a foundation. The
+> evidence is [issue 129](../04-ISSUES/129-nothing-makes-a-machine-trust-the-meshs-authority/02-resolution.md).
+> Extended the same day to every converged machine — `novox`, `g14` and `shanks` each hold the anchor
+> and verify with a plain client. `ace` is excluded on purpose: it is adopted, so a module assigned
+> there is held rather than run, which is right and is not trust.
+
+## Consequences
+
+The predecessor's authority can be retired from a machine once this module is assigned to it,
+which is the first time that has been true. `git` over HTTPS to the mesh's forge starts working,
+so the ssh-only clone URL stops being a rule. A module on any machine can call another module's
+internal name and verify it.
+
+What got harder: one more module to assign to a machine that needs it, and the machine's trust
+store now changes when an assignment changes — which is the point, and is also a thing an operator
+can be surprised by. The fetch without prior trust is the same exposure ADR 0098 accepted, now on
+every machine that holds the module rather than only where a proxy runs: anything that can stand
+in the middle of the mesh's own network at the moment of the fetch can be believed. The mesh
+already treats that network as the thing it authenticates.
+
+## References
+
+- [issue 129](../04-ISSUES/129-nothing-makes-a-machine-trust-the-meshs-authority/00-report.md) —
+  the symptom and the evidence.
+- [ADR 0098](0098-a-fact-a-provider-makes-at-first-start-is-fetched-from-it.md) — a fact made at
+  first start is fetched from its provider; this extends it from one program to the machine.
+- [ADR 0082](0082-the-registry-is-reached-by-name-and-trusted-by-the-overlay.md) — the precedent
+  this deliberately does not follow, and why it is right where it is.
+- [ADR 0005](0005-the-node-host.md) — the host is where one operating system's difference lives.
+- [`03-DESIGN/01-to-be/08-connectivity.md`](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/08-connectivity.md).

02-DECISIONS/0148-the-meshs-names-are-resolved-not-copied-into-containers.md

@@ -0,0 +1,176 @@
+---
+topic: the tiers
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-30
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md
+---
+
+# 148. The mesh's names are resolved, not copied into every container
+
+## Context
+
+The mesh gives every container it declares the whole roster of mesh names as entries written into
+the container's own hosts file at creation
+([design 08 §2](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/08-connectivity.md),
+[ADR 0066](0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md)). A container takes those entries once and never
+looks again.
+
+Three issues are the same fact arriving three times.
+
+**A container keeps the address it was made with.** Adopting the predecessor's tunnel moved the hub's
+private address; the declaration followed it within one push and nothing on the machine did. The
+forge's container held the old address, lost its database, reported healthy while its existing
+connections lasted, and then the public name went down
+([issue 109](../04-ISSUES/109-a-container-keeps-the-address-it-was-made-with/00-report.md)).
+
+**The same fault, four days later, undetected for five days.** One container had restarted 2286 times
+against a database it could no longer find, while the mesh reported the machine as doing what it was
+told. Inside it, `novox.internal` was an address that had not existed for five days
+([issue 135](../04-ISSUES/135-a-containers-mesh-names-are-not-compared/00-report.md)). Forty-eight
+other containers were current, none of them corrected — each had been recreated for some other
+reason and picked up the roster on the way.
+
+135 was fixed by putting the roster into the digest the host compares a container against, so a
+container whose names moved is recreated like one whose image moved. **That made the roster part of
+every container's identity**, which is the third arrival:
+
+**One name moving replaces every container in the mesh.** Migrating one small module on one machine
+took four routine actions; each changed the roster, and each replaced every container on the control
+node — its own store, the registry, the edge proxy, the forge, the directory, mail. The control plane
+was unreachable twice while its own store came back through crash recovery
+([issue 151](../04-ISSUES/151-a-new-name-recreates-every-container-in-the-mesh/00-report.md)). None of
+the replaced containers had anything to do with the module being migrated, or with its machine.
+
+The blast radius of a name is now every container that carries the list, which is all of them. The
+node-by-node migration ahead adds names one module at a time — on one machine alone that is around
+twenty-five — and each would be a full restart of every service on the hub.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+**1. Keep the roster in every container and accept the churn.** Rejected. It is not a cost that can
+be paid down: the mesh gets more names as it grows, and every name costs a restart of everything.
+A rollback costs another.
+
+**2. Scope each container's entries to the names it actually binds.** A container is given the names
+of the things it declared a requirement on, so a name's blast radius is its consumers. Tidy, needs no
+new mechanism, and keeps 135's guarantee exactly.
+
+Rejected, and this is the close one. It contradicts the standing intent that **anything on the mesh
+can call anything on it** — three cases, same machine, the private network, the public network, and
+no fourth. Scoping resolution to declared couplings makes a name reachable only where the mesh was
+told in advance that it would be wanted, and a person debugging inside a container would find names
+missing that exist everywhere else on the machine. It also leaves the roster in the digest, so the
+churn returns the moment a widely-bound name moves — smaller, not gone.
+
+**3. Resolve at lookup time through the machine's resolver, and copy nothing.** Chosen.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A container resolves the mesh's names through its machine's resolver, at the moment it asks. No
+mesh name and no mesh address is written into a container, and none is part of a container's
+identity.**
+
+The three consequences that make this worth doing:
+
+- **Staleness stops being possible**, rather than being detected. 109 and 135 are not bugs that were
+  fixed; they are a shape that no longer exists. A name that moves is answered differently by the next
+  lookup, in every container, with nothing recreated and nothing restarted.
+- **A name's blast radius becomes nothing.** Assigning a module on one machine does not touch a
+  container on another.
+- **Anything can still call anything**, which option 2 gave up. The resolver answers every mesh name to
+  every asker on the machine, exactly as it answers the machine itself.
+
+**The resolver is a machine-level process, not a container** — one of the modules that is not a
+container at all — so a container depending on it is not the circularity it would be if the mesh's
+own store had to resolve a name through something the store's own runtime had to start first.
+
+**What a module declares for itself is untouched.** Entries a manifest asks for are the module's own,
+stay in the container, and stay in its identity: they are part of what the module *is*, they do not
+move when the mesh's roster does, and the mesh does not know what they mean.
+
+**The machine's own roster file is untouched.** It is a file, rewritten in place, read by processes and
+people; nothing restarts when it changes. It is only the *copy into each container* that this ends.
+
+### The order this lands in, which is not a preference
+
+**Nothing may stop copying names until resolution works from a container.** Removing the copy first
+reintroduces 109 and 135 — silently, and on a live mesh, which is exactly how both were found.
+
+1. **A container on any network can reach the resolver.** Today a container on the runtime's default
+   network asks from an address the converged filter drops, so it has no DNS at all
+   ([issue 110](../04-ISSUES/110-a-container-on-the-runtimes-own-network-cannot-reach-the-resolver/00-report.md));
+   and on two of four machines the resolver binds loopback only, so the runtime hands containers a
+   public resolver instead. Both are prerequisites, not related work.
+
+   > **Progressive insight — 2026-09-30, later the same day. The loopback claim was wrong.** The
+   > resolver bound the private address on all four machines; on two the runtime had never been told
+   > to use it, and on all four the resolver discarded a query that arrived on the runtime's bridge.
+   > The step stands; the facts under it were those. Both fixed the same day
+   > ([issue 110's resolution](../04-ISSUES/110-a-container-on-the-runtimes-own-network-cannot-reach-the-resolver/01-resolution.md)),
+   > and step 3 landed after them.
+2. **The runtime is told which resolver to use, per machine, as a file** — not per container as a
+   creation-time argument, or the resolver's address is back in every container's identity and the
+   problem has only got smaller.
+3. **Then, and only then, the roster leaves the declaration and the digest.**
+
+Until step 3 the mesh keeps copying, and keeps comparing. 151 stays open until step 3 lands; it is not
+closed by this record, only answered by it.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+- **A container resolves a name that moved, without being recreated.** Move a name the mesh serves;
+  from a container that was running before the move and has not been touched since, the name answers
+  with the new address. This is the one 109 and 135 would both have failed.
+- **A name's blast radius is nothing.** Add a routed name on one machine; no container on any other
+  machine is recreated. The apply report on each machine says nothing changed. This is 151.
+- **Anything calls anything.** From a container on any machine, every `<node>.internal` name and every
+  routed name the mesh serves resolves — including names the module never declared a requirement on,
+  which is the guarantee option 2 would have given up.
+- **On every network the runtime offers.** The first three hold for a container on the runtime's
+  default network as well as one on a declared network, because the default network is the case that
+  has no DNS today.
+- **No mesh name is in a container's spec.** A test asserts the digest a host computes for a container
+  does not move when the mesh's roster does, and does move when the module's own declared entries do.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **The resolver becomes load-bearing for every container**, where before it was load-bearing for the
+  machine. This is a real cost and is accepted: a resolver that is down is a machine that cannot
+  resolve, which is already true of the machine itself, and is a smaller event than a roster change
+  destroying and recreating every container on the machine.
+- **Design 08's "a file rather than a resolver" no longer describes containers.** It was written when
+  the mesh had no resolver and it gave the right answer then. The reasoning it rested on — every Linux
+  has a hosts file, no package needed — was already overtaken by names a hosts file cannot express:
+  service names and wildcards under `<node>.internal`, which is why the resolver was built.
+- **ADR 0066's mesh-wide propagation is kept and its mechanism changes.** A routed name still reaches
+  every asker in the mesh; it reaches them through the resolver rather than by being written into each
+  container. The consequence 0066 records — that an internal issuer's challenge needs the routed name
+  resolvable inside the mesh — holds unchanged and by the same means the machine already uses.
+- **Issue 110 stops being a container-DNS inconvenience and becomes a prerequisite** for the mesh not
+  restarting itself whenever it learns a name.
+- **A container that names a resolver of its own has opted out of the machine's**, and the copy this
+  record removes was the only reason such a container could reach anything by a mesh name.
+
+  > **Progressive insight — 2026-09-30, the afternoon this landed. Found the hard way.** The mail
+  > system's admin, behind Mailu's own resolver, lost its database the moment the copy went
+  > ([issue 171](../04-ISSUES/171-a-modules-own-resolver-knows-no-mesh-name/00-report.md)). A `dns` on
+  > a container is a decision about whether mesh names exist inside it, not a preference; the module
+  > was corrected, and whether the controller should refuse the contradiction is that issue's open
+  > question.
+
+- **A container started by hand gets the mesh's names too**, where before only declared containers did.
+  Design 08 drew that boundary deliberately, on the grounds that reaching into every container is what
+  a nameserver would be for. This record accepts that consequence rather than working around it: a
+  person debugging in a hand-started container resolving the same names as everything else is the
+  behaviour worth having, and it is what "anything can call anything" means.
+
+## References
+
+- [issue 151](../04-ISSUES/151-a-new-name-recreates-every-container-in-the-mesh/00-report.md) — one name replaces every container; the question this answers
+- [issue 135](../04-ISSUES/135-a-containers-mesh-names-are-not-compared/00-report.md) — the roster put into the digest
+- [issue 109](../04-ISSUES/109-a-container-keeps-the-address-it-was-made-with/00-report.md) — the first arrival
+- [issue 110](../04-ISSUES/110-a-container-on-the-runtimes-own-network-cannot-reach-the-resolver/00-report.md) — the prerequisite
+- [ADR 0066](0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md) — routed names propagate mesh-wide; extended here
+- [design 08 §2](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/08-connectivity.md) — the file-not-resolver reasoning this narrows

02-DECISIONS/0149-the-live-mesh-is-the-test-bed.md

@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
+---
+topic: building it
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-30
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+supersedes: 02-DECISIONS/0068-the-lab-takes-requests.md
+---
+
+# 149. The live mesh is the test bed
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0068](0068-the-lab-takes-requests.md) proposed that the lab accept queued requests
+— a bed and a commit — answer them one at a time from a copy it owns, and expose that through tools so
+an agent could start a run and come back to it. It has been `proposed` since 2026-09-12 and nothing was
+built.
+
+What happened instead is that the mesh became the thing under test. It runs on four machines; every
+fault worth finding in the last month was found on them, and none was found in a bed:
+
+- a container holding an address that had not existed for five days, on the control node
+  ([issue 135](../04-ISSUES/135-a-containers-mesh-names-are-not-compared/00-report.md));
+- a machine reading healthy for eleven hours while no module could reach another
+  ([issue 145](../04-ISSUES/145-a-machine-reads-healthy-while-its-modules-cannot-reach-each-other/00-report.md));
+- one name replacing every container on the hub
+  ([issue 151](../04-ISSUES/151-a-new-name-recreates-every-container-in-the-mesh/00-report.md));
+- a consumer assertion that is correct on a mesh being raised and fatal on one that is running
+  ([issue 156](../04-ISSUES/156-moving-a-consumers-delivery-subject-stops-the-control-plane/00-report.md)).
+
+The last is the one that settles it. That change was exercised on the raise path — which is what a bed
+*is* — and the raise path is the only path on which the fault cannot appear. A bed raises a mesh; it
+does not have a mesh that has been running for weeks, with consumers already bound, containers created
+against an older roster, and an adopted machine carrying a predecessor's configuration. **The faults
+that cost the most were all faults of a mesh that already exists**, and a bed is by construction a mesh
+that does not.
+
+Lab runs are also expensive in a way that changed the behaviour around them: each costs a build and
+several minutes, so they were batched, and a batched test is one whose result arrives after the next
+three changes were already written.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+**1. Build 0068 as proposed.** Rejected. It answers a question nobody is asking: the bottleneck was
+never that a person had to sit at the lab, it was that a bed cannot hold the state the faults live in.
+Queueing and tooling a mechanism that finds the wrong class of fault faster is not an improvement.
+
+**2. Leave 0068 `proposed`.** Rejected, and it is why this record exists rather than nothing. A record
+that contradicts current practice and sits unresolved is worse than either answer: it reads as intent
+to anyone who finds it, and the practice it contradicts is written down nowhere but a handoff note.
+
+**3. Record that the live mesh is the test bed, and supersede 0068.** Chosen.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A change is verified against the mesh that is running.** Not because a bed would be unwelcome, but
+because the state that breaks things is state a bed does not have: containers made against an older
+roster, consumers already bound, an adopted machine, a store with weeks of history.
+
+**A change that can only be exercised on the raise path is not verified.** If the only test available
+raises a fresh mesh, the record says so, and says which case was therefore not covered. The words
+"exercised on a fresh mesh" are a statement about coverage, not a pass.
+
+**The lab is not retired**, and [ADR 0016](0016-the-lab.md) stands. It remains the place to raise a
+mesh from bare, which is the one thing the live mesh cannot be asked to do and the one thing a bed does
+better than anything else. What this record removes is the lab as the *default* answer to "is this
+change good", and with it 0068's queue, tools and request protocol.
+
+**Accuracy over a green run.** An honest failure on the live mesh beats a pass in a bed that could not
+have failed — and a change that is risky on the running mesh is a reason to make the change smaller,
+not a reason to test it somewhere it cannot break.
+
+**What 0068 got right is kept as a rule, not a mechanism:** a run reads a copy that is not anybody's
+working tree. Every run of the lab that mattered was pinned to a checkout rather than a worktree, and
+the ones that were not produced results about code nobody had written down.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+- **A record that says a change was verified says on what.** Where it was a fresh mesh, it says which
+  case is uncovered. This is the clause that would have caught 156: its change was verified, honestly,
+  on the only path where it works.
+- **The lab is not in the path of a merge.** No check, playbook or handoff requires a bed to have run.
+- **0068 is unreachable as intent.** Its status is `superseded` and it names this record, so a reader
+  arriving at the queue design finds out immediately that it was not built and why.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **A fault can be introduced on the machines that serve.** This is the cost, it is real, and it was
+  paid twice in one evening — a control plane crash-looping for half an hour, and every container on the
+  hub recreated five times. Both were found in minutes because they were live, and both would have
+  passed a bed.
+- **There is no pre-merge gate beyond the repositories' own suites.** `make check` and the three hq
+  checks are what stands between a change and the machines, which raises what those suites are worth
+  and makes a test that cannot fail a genuine defect rather than an untidiness.
+- **Raising a mesh from bare is now the lab's whole job**, and is exercised deliberately rather than
+  as a side effect of testing something else. The foundation work
+  ([issue 146](../04-ISSUES/146-the-foundation-cannot-be-raised-on-the-bus-the-mesh-runs-on/00-report.md))
+  is that job, and it is also the proof that the mesh can make another of itself.
+- **An agent cannot hand a run to a queue and come back**, which 0068 would have given. In practice it
+  watches a push and reads the machines, which is what happened anyway.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0068](0068-the-lab-takes-requests.md) — superseded by this
+- [ADR 0016](0016-the-lab.md) — the lab, which stands
+- [issue 156](../04-ISSUES/156-moving-a-consumers-delivery-subject-stops-the-control-plane/00-report.md) — correct on the raise path, fatal on a running mesh

02-DECISIONS/0150-a-modules-own-code-runs-as-supervised-processes-under-one-account.md

@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-30
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0047-a-module-runs-its-code-as-its-own-process-with-its-own-account.md
+---
+
+# 150. A module's own code runs as supervised processes under the module's one account
+
+## Context
+
+The repository answers "what runs a module's own code" two ways and reconciles them nowhere
+([issue 117](../04-ISSUES/117-a-modules-own-code-is-a-container-and-a-process/00-report.md)).
+
+[ADR 0047](0047-a-module-runs-its-code-as-its-own-process-with-its-own-account.md) is accepted and
+says **a container** — "the tool runtime carrying that module's compiled code" — and "one module, one
+process, one account". Two `proposed` design documents say a **`process`** resource running an argv,
+supervised by the machine, and one of them declares *four* of them for a single module and presents
+four as the point. Neither design document names 0047 in its `decisions:`, and the string `process`
+as a resource type appears in no decision record at all. The thing as built is the container.
+
+Two things have happened since 0047 was written that bear on it directly.
+
+[**ADR 0142**](0142-the-mesh-delivers-its-own-components-as-binaries.md) decided that the mesh's own
+components are binaries on the machine rather than container images, and
+[issue 114](../04-ISSUES/114-should-the-controller-be-a-container-or-a-process/00-report.md) was closed
+by it. That settled the mesh's components and deliberately said nothing about a module's.
+
+And the standing definition of a module hardened: **a module is software that delivers one or more
+services, and a module is not a container.** It may deliver them as a container, an installed package
+with a unit, a binary, or configuration files; 61 of 73 happen to use a container and 11 do not,
+including the resolver, sshd and fail2ban. A rule that a module's *own code* must be a container makes
+the one kind of module the mesh writes itself the only kind that has no choice.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+**1. Hold 0047 as written: a container.** Rejected. Its own reasoning does not require one. What 0047
+argued for was a runtime **per module** rather than one for the whole node, because a node-wide runtime
+could not hold a per-module broker account and per-module runtimes competing on one tool key would each
+be handed calls for tools they do not have. A supervised unit per module satisfies that argument
+exactly — it is per module, and a unit runs as an account. The container was the mechanism to hand, not
+the conclusion.
+
+**2. Let each design document choose.** Rejected; that is the present state and it is what issue 117
+reports. A module author reading the guide writes four processes; a module author reading the record
+writes a container; nothing tells either that the other exists.
+
+**3. Settle the hosting form as a supervised process, and settle the count separately.** Chosen.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A module's own code runs as one or more supervised processes on the machine, under the module's single
+account.** Where [ADR 0047](0047-a-module-runs-its-code-as-its-own-process-with-its-own-account.md) says
+"a container, the tool runtime carrying that module's compiled code", read this record. Everything else
+0047 decided stands untouched: a tool is served on its own key, only the module that serves it answers,
+and the module's account is scoped to exactly its tool keys.
+
+**The invariant is the account, not the process count.** 0047's "one module, one process, one account"
+carried its weight in the last clause. Its stated worry about a second process was "not a second one to
+scope and seal" — a second *identity* to grant, seal a secret to, and scope on the bus. Several
+processes sharing the module's one account create no second identity, so nothing further is scoped or
+sealed, and a module may therefore declare as many as its work has shapes: events, tools, a
+provisioner, a scheduled ingest. **What a module may not have is two accounts.**
+
+**A module that delivers its service as a container still does.** This record is about the code the
+module itself carries — its tools, its events, its provisioner — and not about the software it delivers.
+A module wrapping a third-party image wraps a third-party image.
+
+**Why supervised by the machine rather than by the mesh:** it is the same answer ADR 0142 gave for the
+mesh's own components, for the same reason. A unit the machine restarts needs no image, no registry
+pull and no runtime to be up before the mesh's own code can run — which matters most for exactly the
+modules whose code the mesh cannot start any other way.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+- **No design document describes a hosting form for a module's own code without citing this record.**
+  Designs 18 and 20 name it in `decisions:`; this is the gap issue 117's third point reports, and
+  `cycle.py` already enforces that a to-be design names its decisions.
+- **A module declaring several processes resolves to one account.** A test composes a module with more
+  than one process resource and asserts the mesh mints exactly one broker account for it, scoped to that
+  module's tool keys and nothing else — which is 0047's invariant stated as an assertion rather than a
+  sentence.
+- **A module's own code does not require the container runtime.** A machine with no container runtime
+  can still run a module whose code is its own, which is the claim that separates this from option 1 and
+  is checkable on a machine that has one by asserting the declaration names no image for it.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **The sidecar port stops being needed.** [ADR 0029](0029-a-network-is-a-shape-because-an-action-cannot-be-undone.md)
+  records that "anything that is a service plus a sidecar currently has to publish a port to talk to
+  itself", and the host's `network` shape exists partly for it. A process beside the service on the same
+  machine reaches it without publishing anything, so that pressure goes.
+- **Something must supervise, and it is the machine.** This adds a unit per module's code to what the
+  host writes and owns. The mesh already writes and owns units — `nftables` proves a module can write one
+  and run it — so the mechanism exists; the count grows.
+- **A module's code is delivered, not pulled**, which puts it behind the same gap as the host's own
+  delivery ([ADR 0141](0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md), not built): nothing yet delivers a
+  version of a module's binary to a machine. A container's code arrives by `docker pull`, and this does
+  not. **This is the cost of the decision and it is not paid**; until delivery exists, a module whose code
+  is its own is a module somebody places by hand.
+- **Issue 117 is answered and its three disagreements close differently:** container-or-unit is decided
+  here; one-process-or-several is decided here as several under one account; and whether the record was
+  consulted is fixed by designs 18 and 20 naming this one.
+
+## References
+
+- [issue 117](../04-ISSUES/117-a-modules-own-code-is-a-container-and-a-process/00-report.md) — the contradiction this answers
+- [ADR 0047](0047-a-module-runs-its-code-as-its-own-process-with-its-own-account.md) — extended; its "a container" clause is settled here
+- [ADR 0142](0142-the-mesh-delivers-its-own-components-as-binaries.md) — the same answer for the mesh's own components
+- [ADR 0141](0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md) — the delivery this depends on and which is not built
+- [ADR 0029](0029-a-network-is-a-shape-because-an-action-cannot-be-undone.md) — the sidecar port this relieves

02-DECISIONS/0151-a-routes-internal-name-is-composed-under-the-node-that-serves-it.md

@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
+---
+topic: the tiers
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-30
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md
+---
+
+# 151. A route's internal name is composed under the node that serves it
+
+## Context
+
+A module that requires a route is given two names from one label: a public one, `<label>.<public
+domain>`, and an internal one, `<label>.<node>.internal`
+([ADR 0138](0138-an-assignment-binds-an-endpoint-and-says-how-far-it-reaches.md)). Both were composed
+from the node the module runs on.
+
+The two are answered differently. The public name is published into every machine's roster at the
+address of the node whose proxy serves it ([ADR 0066](0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md)), so
+it reaches the proxy from anywhere in the mesh. The internal name is answered by every machine's
+resolver as *anything under a node's name goes to that node*
+([design 08 §2](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/08-connectivity.md)) — the node it was composed from, which is
+the consumer's. Where the proxy runs on another machine, that name sends a client to a machine with
+nothing listening, while the public name works
+([issue 139](../04-ISSUES/139-an-internal-route-name-resolves-to-the-consumers-node/00-report.md)).
+Every route on this mesh today is served beside its module, so it has not been seen; `route` is
+provided mesh-wide precisely so that stops being true.
+
+Beside it, the roster gave every routed name a second entry with the mesh's suffix appended —
+`<name>.<public domain>.internal` — because it composed a full name for every entry as it does for a
+machine. That name resolved on every machine, was served by nothing, and was refused by the proxy at
+the handshake; the first three names tried while reproducing an unrelated issue were those, and the
+evidence pointed at a regression that had not happened
+([issue 157](../04-ISSUES/157-a-routed-names-internal-alias-is-served-by-nothing/00-report.md)).
+
+## Considered Options
+
+**1. Keep the consumer's name and publish it at the serving node's address**, as the public name is.
+The name stays `<label>.<consumer>.internal` and an exact roster entry overrides the wildcard.
+Rejected: it makes `<x>.<node>.internal` mean *goes to that node* except when it does not, which is
+the one rule the resolver design states; it needs an entry per route where the wildcard needed none;
+and which of an exact entry and a wildcard a resolver answers first is the resolver's business, which
+the mesh deliberately does not know.
+
+**2. A proxy on every machine, so the serving node is always the consumer's.** Rejected for this
+question: it is a different decision about what `route` is — a node-scoped seat with a mesh-wide
+fallback — and this mesh runs one proxy on the hub today. Whatever is decided there, a route served
+from another machine must have a name that reaches it.
+
+**3. Compose the internal name under the node that serves the route.** Chosen.
+
+## Decision
+
+**A route's internal name is `<label>.<serving node>.internal` — composed under the node whose proxy
+answers the route, which is the machine the request arrives at.** The public name is unchanged:
+`<label>.<public domain>` of the node the module runs on, which is where the operator put it.
+
+Where the proxy runs beside the module — every route on this mesh today — the two nodes are one and
+nothing changes. Where it does not, the name says where the request goes, which is what a name under
+a node's name has always meant.
+
+**A routed name has no mesh form.** The roster publishes it as itself, once, at the serving node's
+address. Only a machine has a bare name beside its full one.
+
+What certifies the internal name is unchanged by this: the proxy that terminates it obtains a
+certificate from the mesh's authority for the names it is given, and it is given this one.
+
+Taken on the operator's standing instruction to answer the open design questions in the work order.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+- **Composition.** A controller test contributes a route from a module on one node to a proxy offered
+  from another, gathered the way the controller gathers a consumer's contribution for a provider on
+  another machine, and asserts the internal name carries the serving node.
+- **Publication.** A controller test renders a roster with a machine and a routed name and asserts
+  the routed name appears as itself, once, and never with the suffix appended.
+- **On the mesh.** After the change no machine's roster carries a `<domain>.internal` entry, and a
+  route's internal name still answers from a container with a certificate from the mesh's authority.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **A route served from another machine now has a usable internal name.** The first module assigned
+  that way will resolve, where before it would have resolved to the wrong machine with no error.
+- **The internal name of a route can change when its proxy moves.** A route re-homed from one proxy
+  to another gets a new internal name, as the design's rule implies; clients that dialled the old one
+  reach the old machine. The public name does not move with the proxy and is the stable one.
+- **The roster is one line shorter per routed name**, and a person reading a hosts file no longer
+  finds names that resolve to a refusal.
+- **Issue 139's second question — a per-node route holder — is left open**, and is a decision about
+  what a seat is rather than about a name.
+
+## References
+
+- [issue 139](../04-ISSUES/139-an-internal-route-name-resolves-to-the-consumers-node/00-report.md) — the question
+- [issue 157](../04-ISSUES/157-a-routed-names-internal-alias-is-served-by-nothing/00-report.md) — the alias
+- [ADR 0066](0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md) — routed names propagate mesh-wide; extended here
+- [ADR 0138](0138-an-assignment-binds-an-endpoint-and-says-how-far-it-reaches.md) — how the two names are composed and how far each reaches
+- [design 08 §2](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/08-connectivity.md) — anything under a node's name goes to that node

02-DECISIONS/0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md

@@ -0,0 +1,160 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-30
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0095-the-control-plane-is-the-way-to-ask-a-module.md
+---
+
+# 152. The operator's surface is a module the mesh assigns: the console
+
+## Context
+
+**Since the bus moved, nobody can ask the mesh anything without opening a shell on a machine.** Every
+tool call an operator's assistant makes fails, on every machine including the one the operator sits
+at, with *AMQP not connected*
+([issue 147](../04-ISSUES/147-the-operators-tools-still-dial-the-bus-that-was-removed/00-report.md)).
+The program answering is the predecessor's tool server, started on the workstation by hand, with the
+predecessor's broker address written into the assistant's own configuration. It has no manifest, no
+assignment, no account on the bus, and the mesh has never known it exists. Nothing regressed: the
+mesh removed a transport that a program outside the mesh still dials.
+
+**The mesh has a tool model, and it works.** A module serves each tool on its own subject and its
+account may serve nothing else ([ADR 0047](0047-a-module-runs-its-code-as-its-own-process-with-its-own-account.md));
+a person is issued an account whose only permission is to publish the tool subjects named at issue
+([25 — The bus on NATS](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/25-the-bus-on-nats.md) §7); a client on the
+runtime repository's main branch speaks that account as a command line and as an MCP server. Measured
+on the live mesh on 2026-09-28: a call to the forge's `gitea_list_repos` answered with real
+repositories; the tool list came back empty, because it asks the catalogue for a tool nothing serves
+([ADR 0132](0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md)).
+
+**Two records have already said where the surface belongs.** ADR 0132's consequences: *the MCP
+surface belongs inside the mesh — a module the mesh assigns to the machine where the agent sits, with
+a credential the mesh minted and authority derived from what it may call, not a program started by
+hand with a credential printed to a terminal.* Design [33](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/33-the-tools-the-mesh-answers.md)
+§6 says the same. Neither is a decision about the surface: 0132 decided where a seat's tools live,
+and named the surface in passing.
+
+**And one record says the opposite, in the letter.** [ADR 0095](0095-the-control-plane-is-the-way-to-ask-a-module.md)
+made the control plane *the* way to ask a module, deferred "calling is a grant" until something asked
+for it, and recorded that *nothing outside the control plane can*. A person's account (design 25 §7,
+built 2026-09-28) is exactly that grant, minted for a person. So 0095's exclusivity has already been
+widened once without a record saying so; a module that calls tools widens it a second time, and this
+record is where that is said.
+
+**What a module's account may do today, counted from the composition** (`internal/broker`): publish
+its own events, publish the accept subjects of seats it uses, subscribe its own tools and what it
+consumes. No module principal may publish another module's tool subject. Of 72 modules in the
+catalogue, 45 serve tools and 0 may call one.
+
+The question the work order asks before any code: **does the mesh grow its own operator surface, or is
+the surface an ordinary module that happens to serve tools?**
+
+## Considered Options
+
+**1. The control plane serves the agent protocol itself** — a listener on the controller, or a verb
+its binary runs. Rejected. It puts a surface for tools the control plane does not implement on the one
+component that must stay answerable while it is itself being replaced, which is the reason 0132
+rejected the control plane as the answer to discovery. A person on a workstation would reach it over
+the network, and the networked surface [ADR 0035](0035-one-implementation-several-surfaces.md)
+reserves for that authenticates through an OAuth2 provider that is not configured — so the controller's
+`api` verb correctly serves nothing today, and this option would either wait for it or bypass it.
+
+**2. A program a person installs and starts by hand with a printed credential** — what exists on the
+runtime repository's main. Rejected as the end state. It is outside the mesh in every way issue 147
+names: no assignment, no declaration, no seat, no check that it reaches anything, revoked only by a
+person remembering to. It is the predecessor's arrangement one bus later, and it fails the same way
+the next time an address moves. It stays as the recovery path, the way the command line does
+(ADR 0035): a credential from `operator issue` and the `mesh` client work with no console assigned.
+
+**3. An ordinary module, assigned to the machine the person sits at, holding a credential the mesh
+minted, serving the mesh's tools on that machine's loopback.** Chosen.
+
+## Decision
+
+**The console is a module.** `mesh-console` is built by the mesh, registered like any module,
+assigned to a machine, and given a bus credential sealed to that machine. It serves the mesh's tools to
+whoever is on that machine: to an agent over MCP, and to a person through the same endpoint. Assigning
+it to a machine is what makes the mesh reachable from there; unassigning it revokes that, at the next
+composition, with nothing on the machine to remember to remove.
+
+**A grant to call is a manifest word: `invokes`.** A module declares the tools it calls, each as
+`<module>.<tool>`, or the single entry `*` for every tool on the mesh. The bus grants exactly that
+publish side and nothing beside it — no event, no subscription, no seat. This is ADR 0095's deferred
+first option, taken now that a consumer asks for it; a person's account already has this shape, and
+the same composition derives both. The control plane's `ask` stands, and 0095's audit point with it:
+every call still passes one account whose permission list says what it may ask.
+
+**Authority is the machine's login.** The console listens on the machine's loopback only, declared
+`from: machine`, so whoever can open a socket on the machine is whoever owns the machine, and *the
+account that installed the host owns the mesh on that node*
+([ADR 0034](0034-the-local-account-owns-the-mesh.md)). Anything on a machine may call anything on it,
+and that is the whole of local ([ADR 0144](0144-anything-on-a-machine-may-call-anything-on-it.md)).
+The mesh knows no person: what the audit sees is which console asked, under the account
+`<node>.mesh-console`. How a person's identity reaches a session is the question design 15 leaves
+open, and this record does not close it.
+
+**What the console lists is asked of the modules.** Design 33 §5: a module's own tools are answered by
+the module, from the code that defines them. The tool runtime therefore answers one reserved verb for
+every module it serves — `tools`, the module's tool names, descriptions and argument schemas — and the
+console assembles its list by asking the catalogue which modules the mesh holds and each module what
+it answers. A module that is not running is absent from the list and says so; a tool an agent already
+knows the name of can be called whether or not it was listed. A module may not name a tool of its own
+`tools`; the runtime refuses the collision at load rather than letting one shadow the other. A
+role's tools, and the mesh's own verbs, join the list when the `mesh-controller` seat serves them
+(design 33 §1, third family) — the console reads whatever the mesh can say about itself, and grows as
+that does.
+
+**The console holds one credential and one grant: `*`.** It is the operator's surface on a machine the
+operator owns; narrowing what it may call is a setting on its assignment, which
+[ADR 0046](0046-a-module-configuration-is-its-assignments-not-its-manifest.md) already provides for
+and nothing here builds.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **The way a person drives the mesh is inside the mesh.** It is declared, delivered, replaced and
+  revoked by the same machinery as everything else, and `status` says whether the machine carrying it
+  has applied. Issue 147's shape — a surface kept alive by an address in a file — cannot recur, because
+  there is no file: the console's credential names the bus the mesh is on, and moves when it does.
+- **A module may now call tools, which ADR 0095 had reserved to the control plane.** The grant is
+  explicit, per tool or `*`, and derived by the same composition that grants everything else. A module
+  that declares no `invokes` gains nothing. What got harder: a manifest reviewer has one more field to
+  read for authority, and `*` in it deserves the reader's attention every time.
+- **A new manifest word ships one release before any manifest uses it**, and must reach both parsers:
+  the build machine's and the running controller's. The console's manifest cannot be registered until
+  the controller and the builder that packages it have been rebuilt with the word.
+- **Discovery costs a fan-out per list.** One request per module the mesh holds, answered at once by
+  the bus for every module nothing serves, so the cost is bounded by the modules that are up. The list
+  is cached briefly in the console; a module assigned a moment ago appears at the next refresh.
+- **Every tool runtime must be rebuilt once** to answer `tools`. Until a module is, it is callable and
+  not listed, and the console says which modules did not answer.
+- **The mesh's own verbs are not in the console yet.** `status`, `push`, `assign` are the
+  `mesh-controller` seat's tools under 0132, and the three prerequisites 0132 names are still not in
+  place. A person asking what a node runs still opens a shell for that question, and that gap is design
+  33's to close, not this record's — recorded here so nobody reads the console as the whole of 147.
+- **The person's credential is not retired.** `operator issue` and the `mesh` client remain the path
+  when no console is assigned, and the path an operator uses to bring a mesh up far enough to assign
+  one.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| A module's `invokes` becomes exactly that publish grant, and nothing else | the bus user composition test: a module invoking `shop.price` may publish that subject and no other tool's; `*` may publish every tool subject; neither may publish an event or subscribe anything it did not consume |
+| A malformed `invokes` entry is refused at registration | a parser test: an entry naming no tool is a problem named in the manifest's words |
+| The runtime answers `tools` for every module it serves | the runtime's test: a module registering two tools answers three names, and a module naming one of its own `tools` is refused at load |
+| The console's list is what the modules answer | the client's test against a real bus: two modules up, a third the catalogue holds and nothing serves, and the list carries the two and names the third as not answering |
+| A call from the console reaches a module over the bus | the same test, and the live mesh: the console assigned to a workstation answers `tools/list` on its loopback and a call to the forge returns repositories |
+| The console listens on loopback and nowhere else | its manifest declares `from: machine`, and the filter composed for the machine opens nothing for it |
+
+## References
+
+- [issue 147](../04-ISSUES/147-the-operators-tools-still-dial-the-bus-that-was-removed/00-report.md) — the surface outside the mesh
+- [ADR 0095](0095-the-control-plane-is-the-way-to-ask-a-module.md) — extended: a grant to call, for a module as for a person
+- [ADR 0132](0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md) — where a seat's tools live, and the sentence that named the surface
+- [ADR 0035](0035-one-implementation-several-surfaces.md) — three surfaces over one implementation
+- [ADR 0034](0034-the-local-account-owns-the-mesh.md), [ADR 0144](0144-anything-on-a-machine-may-call-anything-on-it.md) — why loopback is the authority boundary
+- [33 — The tools the mesh answers](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/33-the-tools-the-mesh-answers.md) §5, §6 — discovery, and what serves it to an agent
+- [34 — The console](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/34-the-console.md) — the design this record authorises
+- mesh-tools `src/client.ts`, `src/mcp.ts`, `src/mesh.ts` — the client this makes a module of

02-DECISIONS/0153-the-record-is-read-by-a-module-and-the-console-lists-it.md

@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
+---
+topic: how we work
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-30
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0025-the-design-record-is-read-not-copied.md
+---
+
+# 153. The record is read by a module the mesh assigns, and the console lists it
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0025](0025-the-design-record-is-read-not-copied.md) decided that this repository is **read where
+it is written, never copied to be found**: an agent reads it directly, and a search of the mesh's
+memory consults that agent so its answers appear beside ordinary results. It named the check that
+closes [issue 006](../04-ISSUES/006-hq-is-not-indexed-into-the-knowledge-base/00-report.md): search
+for a phrase that appears only in a design document here, and get it back. It gated the build on an
+agent that did not exist — the mesh session of
+[15 — The agent session](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/15-the-agent-session.md) — and on a search that
+does not exist either, now: the knowledge base 0025 meant was the predecessor's, and since the
+cut-over nothing reaches it ([issue 147](../04-ISSUES/147-the-operators-tools-still-dial-the-bus-that-was-removed/00-report.md)).
+
+**So the two halves of 0025 have no home.** There is no store to be "beside", and no session to be
+the reader. What the mesh has instead, since today: a tool model in which every module answers what
+it serves, and a console on the machine a person sits at that lists every tool the running modules
+answer ([ADR 0152](0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md)). An agent holding the
+console does not search a store; it reads a tool list and calls what fits the question.
+
+**What 0025 could not tolerate was a derived copy** — the enforced copy winning while the reasoned one
+quietly stops being true. It rejected a sync for that reason and for no other. A git checkout is not a
+derived copy: it is the same bytes at a commit the answer names, and the only way it can differ from
+the source is by lagging behind it, which is measurable and stated. 0025's own words allow it —
+*retrieval is an agent reading this repository, not a copy living in a second store* — and the
+transformation that makes a copy dangerous is exactly what a checkout does not do.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+**1. Wait for the mesh session.** Rejected. Design 15 is `designed` with nothing built, its model
+access is a provisions question with no consumer identity yet, and 006 has waited since 2026-08-23.
+A record whose check cannot run is a rule enforced by nothing.
+
+**2. The console reads the repository itself.** Rejected. The console holds nothing and decides
+nothing (ADR 0152, ADR 0035); a reader inside it would be a second implementation of a thing that
+should be one module, unavailable to a person's client and to any other module.
+
+**3. A module that keeps a checkout of the repository and answers questions about it, listed by the
+console like any tool.** Chosen.
+
+## Decision
+
+**The reader is a module: `records`.** It requires the `git` provision — the forge — clones the
+repository its settings name, keeps the checkout current on every merge the forge announces and on a
+timer, and answers over the bus: where a phrase appears as written (document, line, nearest heading),
+one document whole, what a folder holds, and where the checkout stands — always with the commit it
+read. Nothing is indexed, ranked or summarised: a design record is found by its own words, and a
+reader deciding which words matter would be a second opinion about somebody else's document.
+
+**The repository is a setting, not a manifest field.** The module names no mesh
+([ADR 0112](0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md)): which repository it reads is
+the assignment's business, and an installation that keeps its record elsewhere sets that. Until a
+repository is set it serves no tools and says why. Public repositories only; it asks for no
+credential, because a secret it did not need would be one more thing to seal.
+
+**"Beside everything else" is the console's tool list.** 0025's second half — the search consults the
+agent — has no store to consult and needs none: the console lists `records_search` beside the forge's
+tools and the mesh's own verbs, with a description that says when to call it, and an agent choosing
+tools for a symptom is the search. That is surfacing, not merely reaching: nobody has to know this
+repository exists to be offered it.
+
+**Reading stays one-way.** The module reads the forge and answers; nothing flows back into the
+repository. It holds no credential that could write.
+
+**The mesh session, when it exists, is a caller of this module, not a replacement for it.** Design 15's
+*it holds the design record by reading it* is satisfied by asking `records`; the session brings
+judgement, this brings the text.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **Issue 006 closes on 0025's own check**, run through the console: `records_search` for a phrase
+  that appears in one design document here returns that document. The module's test does the same
+  against a repository it makes.
+- **The as-is knowledge document is rewritten.** [`07-knowledge.md`](../03-DESIGN/00-as-is/07-knowledge.md)
+  described the predecessor's two stores; neither is reachable from the mesh, and what the mesh knows
+  is now what its modules answer. Saying otherwise is the failure this repository exists to name.
+- **A checkout lags.** Between a merge and the next sync — seconds when the forge announces it,
+  minutes when it does not — an answer is the previous commit's, and says which. That is the cost of
+  no copy, and it is a number rather than a silence.
+- **The reader depends on the forge module's event, by name.** `consumes: gitea.pull.merged` names a
+  module rather than the `git` seat, because the seat declares no events. A forge that is not gitea
+  leaves the timer as the only refresh, which still works.
+- **What got harder:** the record is now reachable from every machine holding a console, which is what
+  was wanted, and a reader must remember that this repository is public and the mesh is not — the
+  module reads the public repository and nothing about the installation.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| A phrase in one document comes back from where it is written, with the commit | the module's test against a repository it makes; and live, through the console |
+| A merge on the origin is pulled and the next answer names the new commit | the same test |
+| A path outside the checkout is refused, not resolved | a test per shape |
+| A failed sync leaves the checkout standing and is said | a test against an unreachable origin |
+| Without a repository set, no tools are served and the log says why | the module's own start |
+| The console lists `records_search` beside every other tool | the console's listing, live |
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0025](0025-the-design-record-is-read-not-copied.md) — extended: the reader is a module, the search is the console's list
+- [ADR 0152](0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md) — what lists it
+- [issue 006](../04-ISSUES/006-hq-is-not-indexed-into-the-knowledge-base/00-report.md) — what closes
+- [35 — Reading the record](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/35-reading-the-record.md) — the design
+- mesh-catalog `modules/records` — the module (PR 183)

02-DECISIONS/0154-the-meshs-own-verbs-are-the-controller-seats-tools.md

@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-30
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md
+---
+
+# 154. The mesh's own verbs are the mesh-controller seat's tools, and which verbs those are
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0132](0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md) decided that a seat's protocol
+carries its tools in full, that holding a seat means serving them, and that the mesh's own verbs are
+the `mesh-controller` seat's. It named three prerequisites, none in place: the protocol in the store
+rather than in compiled defaults; a protocol richer than a list of verbs; a node-scoped seat's subject
+carrying the node. And it left one thing to a decision per seat: **which verbs each seat serves**,
+because a seat's tools bind every future holder.
+
+The console shipped the same day ([ADR 0152](0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md))
+and made the gap visible from the operator's chair: a person on a workstation could call every tool a
+*module* serves and none of the mesh's own. What a node runs, what is assigned, whether a push
+applied — the questions issue 147 opened with — still meant a shell on the control node. The console's
+own handshake said so.
+
+The control plane already answers every one of those questions, as commands: `status --json`,
+`node show`, `plan --json`, `assign`, `push`. [ADR 0035](0035-one-implementation-several-surfaces.md)
+says a surface is an adapter over those with no decisions in it, and the `api` verb proves the shape:
+every route calls the function the command line calls.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+**1. Leave the mesh's verbs to the shell until an identity provider authenticates the HTTP API.**
+Rejected. The authenticated network surface is for a browser on another machine; the console is
+already behind the machine's login (0152), and the bus already carries every other tool call under an
+account whose permission list says what it may ask. Waiting would keep the one surface the mesh has
+from answering the mesh's own questions, for a reason that does not apply to it.
+
+**2. Serve the verbs as the mesh-controller *module's* tools, `mesh.mod.mesh-controller.tool.<verb>`.**
+Rejected; 0132 rejected it already. The controller holds a seat, and the verbs must keep their address
+while the control plane is being replaced, which is the moment they are most needed. A module's name
+would change with the implementation; the seat's does not.
+
+**3. Call each command's function inside the serving process.** Rejected on two facts: the commands
+print, to the process's standard output, and two calls answered at once would read each other's
+words; and each command opens and closes its own stores, which the serving process holds open. Making
+every command return a value is the larger refactor, and it would give the tools a second code path to
+keep in step with the command line — the thing ADR 0035 forbids.
+
+**4. The holder of the seat runs the command it names, in its own binary, and answers what it
+printed.** Chosen.
+
+## Decision
+
+**The `mesh-controller` seat serves twelve verbs**, and these are its interface, additive within a
+version ([33 — The tools the mesh answers](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/33-the-tools-the-mesh-answers.md) §7):
+
+| verb | answers with | takes |
+|---|---|---|
+| `tools` | every seat's tools, from the mesh's records | nothing |
+| `status` | what is wrong, quiet, behind, waiting — `status --json` | nothing |
+| `nodes` | every machine and its mode | nothing |
+| `node` | what one machine reported, what it is assigned, why | `node` |
+| `modules` | every module, its version, commit and machines | nothing |
+| `seats` | every seat, what it delivers, who holds it — `seats --json` | nothing |
+| `builds` | what was built lately and what came of it | `module` (optional) |
+| `plan` | the declaration a machine would be sent — `plan --json` | `node` |
+| `assign`, `unassign` | the mesh's own words, refusal included | `node`, `module` |
+| `push` | that it was sent; `status` says what the machine did | `node` (optional: every machine behind) |
+| `build` | that the build machine was asked; `builds` says what came of it | `repository`, `path`, `ref` |
+
+**Each verb runs the command it names, in the controller's own binary, and answers what the command
+printed** — the output, whether it succeeded, and, where the command speaks JSON, the same as data. A
+refusal is the command's refusal in the command's words, because it is the same output. A verb takes
+only the arguments its schema names; nothing reaches a flag the schema did not declare. `push` and
+`build` are sent and not waited for: a call that blocked for a whole apply would time out on every
+machine that takes a minute and say nothing about the others.
+
+**The three prerequisites are built.** A seat's protocol is three columns on its row, seeded from the
+compiled defaults where a row had none and additively thereafter, so a verb a release adds joins the
+row and nothing an operator wrote is taken away. A served verb is its name, what it does, and the
+schema of its arguments and answer; a manifest may still write a bare name. A node-scoped seat's tool
+carries the node it is asked of, as the last token of its subject; a mesh-scoped seat's stays flat.
+
+**Holding a mesh seat requires serving its verbs**, judged where the store's set is loaded, and the
+refusal names the missing verbs. The controller's own manifest lists the twelve under `tools`.
+
+**Discovery reads the records, through the seat.** `tools` is one of the twelve because the console
+cannot read the store and should not: the mesh answers for its own records through the role that owns
+them, and the answer is true while any *other* holder restarts. It is not true while the control plane
+itself restarts, and the console says so rather than hiding the modules' tools with it.
+
+**A grant of `*` reaches a role's tools; `seat:<seat>.<verb>` grants one.** The console's `*` needed no
+change to reach the mesh's verbs, which is what a grant meaning *every tool* should mean.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **The console answers the mesh's own questions.** Issue 147's first paragraph closes: what a node
+  runs, what is assigned, whether a push applied, from the machine the person sits at, over the bus,
+  under an account whose permission list says so.
+- **Whoever may call `mesh-controller.push` may change the mesh.** That is the console's `*` on a
+  machine whose login owns the mesh (0152), and a person's account only if `operator issue` says so.
+  A grant reviewer reads `*` and `seat:mesh-controller.` with the same care.
+- **A verb here binds every future controller.** Twelve is deliberate: what an operator asks weekly,
+  and nothing that is still finding its shape (`take`, `converge`, `settings`, `secret` stay commands).
+- **A command's text is the answer**, and text changes. The three verbs that speak JSON carry it as
+  data; the rest are read by a person or an agent, not parsed. Anything that needs a shape asks for
+  `--json` to be added to the command first, which is the right order.
+- **What got harder:** the mesh-controller seat's row now carries a protocol an operator could edit, and
+  a verb removed from the row is a verb the controller stops serving without a build. That is
+  ADR 0122's arrangement applied to tools, and `seats` shows the row.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| Every declared verb is one the binary can run, with the arguments its schema names | a test walks the table and derives a command line for each |
+| A verb missing a required argument is refused in its own words, before anything runs | a test per shape |
+| A holder that does not serve a mesh seat's verbs cannot hold it, and the refusal names them | a catalogue test against a seat with two verbs and a holder with one |
+| A node-scoped seat's tool carries the node; a mesh seat's does not | the bus composition test: two nodes derive two addresses |
+| The controller subscribes its seat's tools and may answer | the composition test, and the golden user list |
+| `*` reaches a role's tools; `seat:` grants one and refuses a name with no verb | the composition test |
+| The protocol is seeded into the row and widened additively | the store-backed seat test |
+| Live: the console lists `mesh-controller.status` and a call answers what `status --json` prints | the rollout of this record |
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0132](0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md) — extended: the prerequisites built, the verbs decided
+- [ADR 0152](0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md) — the surface that lists them
+- [ADR 0035](0035-one-implementation-several-surfaces.md) — a surface is an adapter with no decisions in it
+- [ADR 0122](0122-a-seat-is-data-a-rename-is-a-database-update.md) — the row is the mesh's, and now carries the protocol
+- [33 — The tools the mesh answers](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/33-the-tools-the-mesh-answers.md) — the design this completes

02-DECISIONS/0155-a-definition-names-no-installation-and-how-that-is-checked.md

@@ -0,0 +1,128 @@
+---
+topic: what runs on it
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-30
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md
+---
+
+# 155. A definition names no installation: how that is checked, and the three ways a value that did gets out
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0112](0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md) decided that a module definition
+names no node, no mesh and no host path, and said how the name half is checked: *a catalogue test
+finds no domain name in any definition value*. No such test existed
+([issue 134](../04-ISSUES/134-a-definition-may-still-name-the-mesh/00-report.md)). Written and run
+over the 77 definitions on 2026-09-30, the check it describes finds **42 values**, in 15 definitions,
+and they are of four kinds that want four different answers:
+
+| kind | count | example |
+|---|---|---|
+| a service told its own public name as a literal | 5 | an identity provider's `KC_HOSTNAME`, an object store's console redirect, an automation tool's webhook URL |
+| an operator's value written into the definition | 10 | a mail server's domain, site name, website, and the address it trusts a real-IP header from |
+| this mesh's forge, by URL, as a recipe's build context | 2 | the builder and the proxy, which package the controller's source |
+| an application built outside the mesh, pulled from this mesh's registry | 7 | four sites and tools whose repositories are the operator's own |
+| the world's servers, named by upstream defaults | 10 | a Matrix homeserver's trusted key server, Element's integration manager |
+| a module named after the domain it serves | 8 | one site module, with its paths and network named after it |
+
+Not one was careless. Each was the value the software needs, and until today there was nowhere else
+to put it ([issue 122](../04-ISSUES/122-a-module-cannot-ask-for-its-own-public-name/00-report.md)).
+Two of the answers were built before this record: a module is told the name its route composes
+(`${bound:<route>:name}`, controller PR 149, 2026-09-30), and a source may be a path on the git seat
+([ADR 0111](0111-a-build-source-is-on-the-git-seat-or-external.md)). What was missing: an operator's
+value in a file the software reads, the same for a build *context*, a way to say a name is meant, and
+the check.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+**1. A string search for the installation's own names.** Rejected. The controller is as
+mesh-agnostic as the definitions; it does not know which names are "this mesh's", and a check that had
+to be told would be configured per installation and pass everywhere else. What it can know is the
+*shape*: a name under a public top-level domain, a public address.
+
+**2. Report every such shape.** Rejected. Eight of the 42 were `why` strings — prose the mesh never
+reads, explaining what a port is for — and a check that reports those beside `KC_HOSTNAME` teaches
+people to ignore the report. And a Matrix homeserver *must* name the federation's public key server;
+a check with no way to say so would be a check people argue with rather than obey.
+
+**3. Judge what the mesh acts on; let a definition say which names it means, one by one, with a
+reason; exempt the world's services that a definition may name as a policy default.** Chosen.
+
+**For an operator's value**, one option was to wait for design 27's requirement form in full. Rejected
+for the reason 0112 gave against a slow operator provider: if asking a person for a value takes more
+than a setting, module authors route around it and the literals come back. `${setting:<key>}` is the
+operator provider in its first form, on the settings a module already has.
+
+## Decision
+
+**The check.** Every string value of a definition that the mesh acts on is judged for a hostname under
+a public top-level domain and for a public address. Not judged: `why` and `description`, which are
+prose. Allowed where they can only mean the world: the public registries an `image` may be pulled
+from, the public resolvers a machine may forward to, and the public certificate authorities' ACME
+directories. The container runtime's alias for its own host is the runtime's. A module's own name is a
+value too. The check runs in `module check` and as a catalogue-wide test; **it does not yet refuse at
+registration**, because the list it prints is the list that shrinks, and a registration that refused a
+manifest whose only remedy is a merge elsewhere would refuse the mesh's own catalogue on the day the
+check landed. It moves to registration when the list has been empty for a release.
+
+> **Progressive insight — 2026-09-30.** The list was empty the day the check landed — every remaining name declared with its reason — and the operator asked for registration to refuse at once rather than after a release. It does, since mesh-controller PR 175: `module add` and a build's result are refused in the check's words, naming the way out, and the build stays recorded. The decision stands; only the day moved.
+
+**A name a definition means is declared with its reason.** `names-on-purpose` on a resource maps each
+such name to why: *the federation's public key server, the world's*; *built outside the mesh, from the
+application's own repository, until that repository is a build source on the git seat*. A name the map
+does not cover is still reported. The host never sees the word.
+
+**An operator's value reaches a file as `${setting:<key>}`**, filled from the module's settings
+layers — the mesh's, then the node's — the same layers a mergeable file and a contribution take, so
+`settings set <module>` stays the one place a person's values go. Refused, naming the key and the
+command, when nothing set it: a default for a mail domain would be the literal this removes, and a
+blank written silently would be a service that comes up wrong somewhere that names nothing.
+
+**A build context may live on the git seat.** `context: {"seat": "git", "repository": "<owner>/<name>"}`
+is composed by the mesh that builds it: the request carries each seat's clone base, and a builder told
+no base for a seat a context names refuses the build by the seat's name rather than guessing a forge.
+
+**A module is named for what it is.** The site module named after its domain is `website`.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- **The catalogue names no installation, and a test says so.** The forty-two became zero the same day,
+  by the four answers above; seven of them are declared on purpose and stay visible as the list to
+  shrink — four applications the mesh does not build yet.
+- **An operator's values are the assignment's.** The mail module takes its domain, its site name, its
+  website and the address it trusts a real-IP header from as settings; a mesh that installs it without
+  them is refused at composition, by name, which is the right moment. The module's own README says
+  which.
+- **What got harder:** a manifest reviewer has one more word to read, and `names-on-purpose` on an
+  application's image is a debt visible in the definition until the application is built here. A
+  reader of `settings set` output sees more keys than files, because a key a file asks for is a
+  destination too.
+- **Not decided here:** ADR 0112's requirement form (design 27) still replaces `${setting:…}` and the
+  other placeholders when it lands; this is its first case, the way [ADR 0038](0038-the-mesh-assigns-the-port.md)
+  was for ports. Host paths ([issue 119](../04-ISSUES/119-a-module-definition-decides-where-its-files-live/00-report.md))
+  are the next step of the same group, and the registry's name ([issue 123](../04-ISSUES/123-the-image-registry-is-named-after-a-role/00-report.md))
+  the one after.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| A value naming an installation is reported at its path, in the definition's words | a catalogue unit test over a definition with a hostname in an env value and a public address in a file |
+| Prose, the world's registries in an image, public resolvers, ACME directories and the runtime's own alias are not reported | the same tests |
+| A name declared on purpose is not reported; a name beside it that is not declared is | a test with a homeserver's config |
+| An image from an installation's registry needs a reason | a test without and with the word |
+| A module named after a domain is reported | a test |
+| No definition in the catalogue names an installation | `TestNoCatalogueManifestNamesAnInstallation` over the checkout, and `module check modules/` |
+| A definition naming an installation is refused at registration, and one declaring its names passes | `TestRegistrationRefusesADefinitionNamingAnInstallation` (2026-09-30) |
+| `${setting:key}` fills from the layers, node over mesh; refused by name when unset; not stray when set | three tests |
+| A context on a seat is cloned from the base the mesh sent; a seat with no base is refused by name | the builder's test |
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0112](0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md) — extended: the check it promised, and the operator provider's first form
+- [ADR 0111](0111-a-build-source-is-on-the-git-seat-or-external.md) — a source on the seat; now a context too
+- [issue 122](../04-ISSUES/122-a-module-cannot-ask-for-its-own-public-name/00-report.md), [issue 134](../04-ISSUES/134-a-definition-may-still-name-the-mesh/00-report.md) — what this closes
+- [27 — A module requires, the mesh resolves](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/27-a-module-requires-the-mesh-resolves.md) — where this sits in the larger design
+- mesh-controller PR 169, mesh-catalog PR 188 — the check, the words, and the catalogue that passes it

02-DECISIONS/0156-an-artifact-is-what-a-build-produces-and-the-store-is-named-for-its-scope.md

@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-09-30
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0075-two-stores-and-which-provides-what.md
+---
+
+# 156. An artifact is what a build produces, the artifact store serves every kind, and its seat is named for its scope
+
+## Context
+
+[Issue 123](../04-ISSUES/123-the-image-registry-is-named-after-a-role/00-report.md) found three
+wordings disagreeing about the mesh's registry. The glossary defined *artifact* as "an OCI image, by
+digest"; the manifest's build vocabulary names four kinds — `image`, `upstream`, `bundle`, `archive` —
+and the catalogue builds all four; the seat was `the-artifact-store`, the last of the mesh's own seats
+named after the job it does rather than for the mesh
+([ADR 0121](0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md) decided the
+rename and deferred it). The issue asked whether the seat and provision should be renamed after
+images, and whether the mesh needs two registry implementations at all.
+
+Reading what the store actually serves settles the first question the other way. A kept reference
+has two shapes — `artifact-store://<module>/<artifact>@sha256:…` for an image and
+`artifact-store://<module>/<artifact>/blobs/sha256:…` for an archive — and both are served by the
+same OCI registry, by digest. [ADR 0075](0075-two-stores-and-which-provides-what.md) already
+defined the provision that way: *content-addressed blobs, pinned by digest, no versions, no ranges;
+what the mesh delivers to machines*. The provision was never an image registry. Only the glossary said
+so, and only the seat's name was odd.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+**1. Rename the seat and the provision after images.** Rejected. The store serves archives too, by the
+same protocol; naming it for one kind would be the glossary's mistake made permanent, in the name
+every manifest uses.
+
+**2. Fix the word, rename the seat for its scope, keep the provision.** Chosen. The rename ADR 0121
+deferred as a delivering-seat migration is, since [ADR 0122](0122-a-seat-is-data-a-rename-is-a-database-update.md),
+one update and one alias: the former name resolves forever, a held record follows by cascade, a claim
+written with the old name still holds.
+
+**On two implementations:** left as 0075 decided. Two provisions because two protocols; the OCI
+registry the genesis installs because something must serve images before the mesh can build; the
+forge may provide `artifact-store` too and a mesh may choose it. The bootstrap argument is weaker than
+it reads, as 123 says, and the day the forge is raised at genesis and adopted in place is the day to
+retire the second server — a migration a mesh performs, not a decision to take here.
+
+## Decision
+
+- **An artifact is anything a build produces** — an image, a mirrored upstream image, a bundle, an
+  archive — and the glossary says so. *Image* is one kind. A module is not an image; a module may
+  build several artifacts and install none.
+- **The artifact store serves artifacts of every kind a machine fetches**, images and archives, by
+  digest, over the OCI registry protocol. The provision keeps its name.
+- **The seat is `mesh-artifact-store`.** `the-artifact-store` is its alias. The catalogue's registry
+  module claims the new name; a definition elsewhere claiming the old one still holds.
+- The two other deferred renames — `npm-package-registry` and `git` — stay deferred, and for the
+  same reason no longer. They are one migration each when wanted; nothing here needs them.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- The glossary stops contradicting the manifest vocabulary, and a reader of `artifact-store` reads
+  it as what it is: where the mesh's built things are kept.
+- One migration on the seat table; no manifest but the registry's changes; no consumer of the
+  provision changes, because the provision did not.
+- **What got harder:** nothing measurable. A record that says `the-artifact-store` is read through the
+  alias; design 26's table already carried the new name as intent.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| The former name resolves to the seat once the store's aliases are loaded | a catalogue test |
+| The seat is in the compiled set under its new name, delivering `artifact-store` | the seat tests, updated |
+| The registry module holds the seat under the new name on the live mesh | `seats` after the rollout |
+| The glossary's *artifact* matches the build kinds a manifest may declare | design 18's table and the showcase module list the kinds; the glossary names the same four |
+
+## References
+
+- [issue 123](../04-ISSUES/123-the-image-registry-is-named-after-a-role/00-report.md)
+- [ADR 0075](0075-two-stores-and-which-provides-what.md) — extended: the provision as defined stands, the word is corrected
+- [ADR 0121](0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md), [ADR 0122](0122-a-seat-is-data-a-rename-is-a-database-update.md) — the rename, decided and made cheap
+- mesh-controller migration 0048; mesh-catalog `modules/distribution`

02-DECISIONS/0157-a-build-says-what-it-does-on-the-bus-as-it-happens.md

@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-10-01
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md
+---
+
+# 157. A build says what it does on the bus, as it happens
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0121](0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md) made a build work submitted to a role: the
+build-machine seat accepts a build and emits its outcome, one publish that reaches whoever asked, the
+controller that records it and the catalogue that places it. Everything **between** the request and
+the outcome — which command is running, how long it has taken, where it hung, the compiler's error,
+the clone's refusal — lived in one container's standard error on one machine.
+
+The night of 2026-09-30 showed the cost three times over. A build that failed showed a person one
+line, the first of its failure, in the controller's `builds`; the rest was read with `docker logs` over
+ssh, which the mesh's own rule forbids. A build that ran for minutes could not be told from one that
+had hung. And the builder has no tools and emits nothing but the outcome, so the console
+([ADR 0152](0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md)) had nothing to show while a
+build ran, and no viewer could be built on top of it. The operator's ask was plain: the builder is to
+be fully transparent, with its log on the bus, so that a log viewer can be built on the bus later.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **Keep the log in the outcome.** The result carries the whole log when the build ends. Nothing new
+   on the bus; nothing while the build runs; a viewer sees a build only once it is over, which is
+   exactly when the log matters least.
+2. **A log store.** The builder writes its log to a file or a table and a tool reads it. A second
+   place to keep something the bus already carries, with its own retention, access and failure modes,
+   and no live reading without inventing a subscription over it.
+3. **The log is the role's own events.** Two more events on the build-machine seat beside `built`:
+   `started` when work is taken, and `log.<build id>` for every line, published as the build runs.
+   The events stream already retains every role's events for a week, so a reader follows a build
+   live by subscribing its subject, or reads it back afterwards from the stream, and a viewer is a
+   subscriber and nothing more.
+
+## Decision
+
+**Option 3.** A build machine says everything it does on the bus, as the role it holds, under the
+build's id, and the mesh keeps no other copy.
+
+- The build-machine seat's protocol gains `started` and `log.*`. A holder may therefore publish
+  `mesh.seat.mesh-build-machine.event.started` and `…event.log.<id>`, and no other subject, by the
+  same derivation every seat's grants follow ([ADR 0132](0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md)).
+  The event's tail token is the build's id, so one build is one subject: a reader filters by subject
+  alone, on the server, and a week of other builds does not travel to show one.
+- **Every line goes two ways**: to the machine's own standard error as before, and onto the bus. That
+  includes every command the builder runs, its duration and its failure, and on failure the command's
+  own output line by line — the compiler's words, the clone's refusal. A build machine with nobody
+  listening still prints; a listener reads the same lines.
+- A line is a core publish, unawaited. The stream that holds the role's events captures it on its way
+  through, and a build does not slow to the pace of an acknowledgement per line. Each line carries a
+  sequence number from one, so a reader who joined late, or reads two copies, sees order and gaps.
+  `started` and `built` are published into the stream and awaited, because they are the two facts a
+  later reader must never find missing.
+- **The mesh reads it back from the stream**, never from a record of its own: `builds --log <id>`, and
+  the same verb on the controller's seat ([ADR 0154](0154-the-meshs-own-verbs-are-the-controller-seats-tools.md)),
+  reads one build's subject with a consumer that is gone when the reading is done. `builds` lists
+  each build's id beside it, and `build` says the id it asked with, so a person can follow.
+- Nothing is declared by the builder module for this. The protocol is the seat's, seeded additively
+  into the store ([ADR 0132](0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md)), and the
+  holder's grant follows on the next composition of the broker node.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- A build is watchable while it runs, from anywhere on the mesh, with no access to the build machine.
+  The console's gap of 2026-10-01 — no live progress, no per-merge view — closes on the progress half;
+  the per-merge view is a reader over these subjects and the outcome, and is not built here.
+- A log viewer on the bus is now a plain subscriber: live on `mesh.seat.mesh-build-machine.event.>`,
+  historical from the events stream filtered by a build's subject. NATS carries and retains; it does
+  not view. The `nats` command-line client can tail or replay a subject today; a viewer of our own is
+  later work and needs nothing more from the builder.
+- The events stream grows by a build's log per build, for a week. A build is a few hundred lines; the
+  stream's limits are the bound, as for every other event, and a stream that fills drops the oldest.
+- A line the bus did not take is lost, deliberately, and visible as a gap in the sequence. The outcome
+  is not affected: a build's result never depended on its narration.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| The seat's holder may publish `started` and `log.<id>` and nothing wider | `TestTheBuildMachineMaySayWhatItDoesUnderTheBuildsId` (broker) |
+| A build's lines reach a reader of its subject in order, and the stream holds them afterwards | `TestNatsABuildIsTakenAndItsOutcomeReachesEverybody` against a real server (link) |
+| The seat verb `builds` with a build's id reads that build's log | `TestBuildsWithAnIdReadsThatBuildsLog` |
+| Every command the builder runs is said, with its output on failure | `Command` speaks through the hook every build sets; the builder's tests still see the lines on standard error when nothing listens |
+| Live: a build triggered after the roll-out is readable line by line through the console | done by hand after the merge of mesh-controller PR — see the design's note |
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0121](0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md) — extended: the role now narrates as well as answers
+- [ADR 0132](0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md), [ADR 0154](0154-the-meshs-own-verbs-are-the-controller-seats-tools.md) — the protocol and the verb
+- [ADR 0152](0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md) — the console this feeds
+- [Design 25 — The bus on NATS](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/25-the-bus-on-nats.md) §3, [Design 18 — Building a module](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/18-building-a-module.md)
+- [Issue 176](../04-ISSUES/176-the-consoles-build-tool-neither-waits-nor-registers/00-report.md) — the tool that starts a build and hears nothing; this gives it something to hear

02-DECISIONS/0158-a-provider-with-one-credential-shares-it-with-every-consumer.md

@@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-10-01
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0048-a-provider-creates-the-credential-the-mesh-minted.md
+---
+
+# 158. A provider with one credential shares it with every consumer, and the vault remakes it for all of them at once
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0048](0048-a-provider-creates-the-credential-the-mesh-minted.md) gave every consumer of a
+provision its own credential: the mesh mints one per pair, the provider's own code creates the
+login, and rotating one consumer's touches nothing else. That is right for a database, a broker, an
+object store — software that can hold many logins.
+
+The media software on the home server cannot. A download client has one web password; an indexer
+has one API key; each of the library managers has one key in its configuration; the media server
+holds one token issued elsewhere. There is no login per consumer to create, so
+[ADR 0113](0113-the-vault-makes-every-secret.md)'s only remaining form applied: the value is
+*accepted*. On 2026-10-01 the home server held forty-seven accepted own secrets and twelve accepted
+pair credentials, every one rotatable only by a person changing the software by hand and accepting
+the new value, and one pair credential sat *made* and wrong because nobody could accept the real one.
+The operator asked for every password in the vault and rotatable, and for a library manager's
+definition to receive the download client's credential and address through provisioning like
+anything else (filed as the forge's issue 243 on this repository).
+
+The address half already works: the library manager requires the download client's API provision,
+the provider serves scheme, port and user name, and the binding carries them. Only the credential
+half had no form.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **Keep accepting.** Honest about what the software can do and what the mesh cannot, and it is
+   the state the home server was in: nothing rotates, a consumer added later needs a person, and an
+   unknown predecessor password stays unknown for ever.
+2. **Put a login per consumer in front of the software.** A proxy that holds the one credential and
+   issues many. A second service per provider, with its own credential to keep, to make the mesh's
+   model fit software that does not share it.
+3. **Let the provider say its one credential is the credential.** An offer names which of the
+   provider's own secrets *is* what every consumer receives. The vault keeps one record, sealed to
+   the provider's machine, every current consumer's machine and the operator, and because it stores
+   no plaintext it cannot seal an existing value to a later consumer — so it **remakes the value
+   for all of them at once** whenever the set of consumers changes or a rotation is asked. The
+   provider takes it the way an own secret is taken ([ADR 0114](0114-a-shared-credential-rotates-over-two-credentials.md),
+   issue 180); consumers read it at start.
+
+## Decision
+
+**Option 3.** A provider whose software holds one credential shares that credential, and the mesh
+owns its whole lifecycle.
+
+- **The offer says so.** `{"name": "download-client-api", "credential": {"own": "password"}}` on a
+  provider's `provides` entry names one of its own secrets as the credential of that provision. The
+  named own secret must say how it is taken (`taken: at-start` or `taken: applied`); an offer
+  naming an undeclared or untaken secret is refused at parse.
+- **One record, many seals.** The vault keeps one value per (provider assignment, provision). It is
+  sealed to the provider's machine, to each consumer's machine that currently binds the provision,
+  and to the operator. Every consumer's binding file carries the provider's one user name and the
+  secret file carries the shared value; the shape a consumer reads is the pair credential's, so a
+  consumer's definition does not know whether its credential is shared.
+- **Remade for all, together.** When a consumer binds or unbinds, or `secret rotate` is asked on the
+  provider's own secret, the vault makes a new value and seals it to every current holder in one
+  act, and the mesh sends every holding machine. The provider restarts on the new value or applies
+  it at start; each consumer restarts on it. There is no window between two credentials, because
+  there is one credential; there is the restart, stated as the cost below.
+- **An accepted shared value is sealed to everyone the moment it is accepted.** `secret accept` on
+  the provider's own secret is the one moment the mesh holds the plaintext, and it seals copies for
+  every current consumer then. It is not remade afterwards ([ADR 0113](0113-the-vault-makes-every-secret.md)):
+  a consumer that binds later is refused until the value is accepted again, in words that say so.
+- **A value the software issues itself stays accepted.** A token the media server obtains from its
+  vendor cannot be set by the mesh; its provision keeps the accepted form until a module can deliver a
+  value it did not mint to the vault, which this record does not build.
+- **Nothing changes for software that holds many logins.** ADR 0048's form stays the default; this
+  is the form for an offer that says it has one credential.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- The media stack's six providers stop needing a person per consumer. A library manager binding
+  the download client gets a working credential the mesh made, and an unknown predecessor password
+  is replaced by one the mesh knows, recoverable with the operator's key.
+- **Adding or removing a consumer restarts every consumer of that provision and the provider.**
+  That is the price of one credential, and it is paid when a definition binds, not at an hour of
+  nobody's choosing. It is stated in the plan's words when it happens.
+- Rotation of a shared credential is [ADR 0114](0114-a-shared-credential-rotates-over-two-credentials.md)'s
+  single-party form across several machines: in place, all holders sent together. The staged form
+  for a backend that takes its credential once is still not built, and a provider whose own secret
+  says `applied` refuses rotation by name until it is.
+- The vault can name who holds a shared value — the copies are the record — so *who has this* stays
+  a query, as design 13 requires.
+- The accepted count on the home server becomes a list that shrinks, provider by provider, as each
+  one's start applies the file.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| An offer may name one of its own secrets as its credential; an undeclared or untaken secret is refused at parse | manifest tests |
+| A consumer of a shared provision receives the provider's value as its pair credential, under the provider's one user name | resolver and declaration tests |
+| The record is sealed to the provider, every current consumer and the operator; a consumer binding or unbinding remakes it for all | inventory tests against a raised store |
+| Rotating the provider's own secret remakes every holder's copy, and an accepted value is sealed to current consumers once and not remade | inventory tests |
+| Live: a library manager on the home server binds the download client with a value the mesh made, the client takes it at start, and a rotation through the console reaches both | done by hand after the media catalogue's providers apply the file at start |
+
+*2026-10-01:* the first four rows pass in mesh-controller PR 184 (`make check` green); the live row waits for the first provider definition to say `credential` and `taken`.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0048](0048-a-provider-creates-the-credential-the-mesh-minted.md) — extended: the per-consumer form stays the default; this is the form for one credential
+- [ADR 0113](0113-the-vault-makes-every-secret.md), [ADR 0114](0114-a-shared-credential-rotates-over-two-credentials.md) — the accepted form and the single-party rotation this rests on
+- [Issue 180](../04-ISSUES/180-a-modules-own-secret-cannot-be-rotated/00-report.md) — the `taken` word and the rotation this reuses
+- [Design 24 — The secrets vault](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/24-the-secrets-vault.md), [Design 13 — Credentials and their rotation](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/13-credentials-and-their-rotation.md)
+- The forge's issue 243 on this repository, where the operator's ask and the home server's count were recorded

02-DECISIONS/0159-a-tool-call-names-the-machine-and-a-holder-serves-its-seats-verbs.md

@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-10-01
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md
+---
+
+# 159. A tool call names the machine it is for, every answer says which machine answered, and a holder's runtime serves its seat's verbs
+
+## Context
+
+[ADR 0152](0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md) made a module's tools subjects on
+the bus and the console the place a person reaches them. [ADR 0154](0154-the-meshs-own-verbs-are-the-controller-seats-tools.md)
+made the mesh's own verbs the controller seat's tools, served by the controller. Design 33 said what
+a seat's tools are, that holding a seat means serving them, and that a node-scoped seat's verb
+carries the machine.
+
+What was built stopped short in two places ([issue 182](../04-ISSUES/182-a-tool-call-reaches-whichever-instance-answers-first/00-report.md)).
+A module's tools were one subject per module in one queue group, so with the database engine on two
+machines a call reached whichever instance answered first, unnamed, and nobody could ask one machine's.
+And no module served the verbs of a seat it held: the runtime did not know which seats its module
+claimed, and no seat but the controller's declared verbs. The operator named it: a tool call must be
+able to say *the store on the control node*, and the engine holding the store seat must serve the
+store's tools as well as its own.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **Leave the queue group and ask the controller which machine answered.** Nothing changes on the
+   bus; a caller cannot choose, only learn afterwards. Useless for the question that was asked.
+2. **A subject per machine instead of one per module.** Every call names a machine; a stateless
+   module on three machines loses the one-of-them answer a queue group gives for free, and every
+   caller has to know where things run.
+3. **Both subjects, and the machine in every answer.** An instance serves its module's subject in the
+   queue group as before, and the same subject with its machine as the last token. A caller that
+   names no machine gets one instance and is told which; a caller that names one gets that one. The
+   grant for a tool covers both. And a holder's runtime serves its seat's verbs by the same means,
+   from what the credential tells it.
+
+## Decision
+
+**Option 3.**
+
+- **Two subjects per tool, one default.** `mesh.mod.<module>.tool.<tool>` in the queue group, and
+  `mesh.mod.<module>.tool.<tool>.<node>` served by the instance on that machine alone. In the
+  caller's words, `<module>.<tool>@<node>`. A runtime that does not know its machine serves only the
+  first, which is what it always did.
+- **Every answer says which machine answered.** The reply carries the node; the console appends
+  *answered by <node>* as its own line after the module's unshaped answer, and `mesh call` prints it.
+  An answer from a module on several machines is never an answer from nowhere.
+- **The console offers the machine on every module tool** as an optional `node` argument, lists it,
+  strips it into the subject and never passes it to the module. A seat's verb takes none: the seat's
+  scope decides where it is served.
+- **The grant covers both subjects.** `invokes: [<module>.<tool>]` permits the plain subject and the
+  machine-addressed one; `*` already permitted everything beneath `tool`.
+- **A holder's runtime serves its seat's verbs.** The broker credential the mesh writes names the
+  seats the module claims and, for each, its scope and the verbs the seat promises. The runtime
+  serves each verb with the module's tool of the same name on the seat's own subject — flat for a
+  mesh seat, with the machine for a node-scoped one — and the bus admits that subscription only
+  where the module holds the seat, because the holder's grant is composed from the holding. A
+  claimant that does not hold the seat here is refused the subscription and serves nothing. A
+  claimant missing a tool a seat promises is already refused at registration (design 33 §3).
+- **The store seat's first verbs**, so the operator's question has an answer: `databases`, every
+  database the store holds with its owner and size, and `query`, one read-only statement against one
+  database. The database engine serves both as tools of those names and lists them in its definition.
+  Which verbs a seat serves is a decision per seat and binds every holder; these two are the smallest
+  set that makes the store askable.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- *List the databases of the store on the control node* is `mesh-store.databases` through the seat,
+  answered by its holder wherever it sits, or `postgres.databases@novox` through the module on one
+  named machine. Both say who answered.
+- Every module's runtime serves one more subscription per tool and, for a claimant, one per promised
+  verb. No manifest changes for the per-machine half; the seat half needs each holder's definition to
+  list the seat's verbs among its tools, which registration already demands.
+- The runtime change reaches a module when the module is rebuilt on the new runtime image; until
+  then that module answers only on its plain subject, and a call naming its machine is refused as
+  unserved, in words that say so.
+- The credential gains `claims`; a module issued before this carries none and serves no seat verb
+  until it is issued again. `rollout mint` for the holders is the one-time cost.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| A call naming a machine reaches that machine's instance; an unnamed call reaches one and says which | mesh-tools, against a real bus: a module on two machines |
+| A claimant serves a seat's verb on the seat's subject, and the answer names the machine | the same test |
+| The console lists `node` on a module's tool and not on a seat's verb, and the answer carries *answered by* | mesh-tools, the MCP conformance test |
+| The grant for a tool covers the plain and the machine-addressed subject | `TestInvokingAToolMayAddressTheMachineToo` (controller) |
+| Live: the store's databases listed from the control node by name through the console, and through the store seat | done by hand after the roll-out and the catalogue's step |
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0152](0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md) — extended: the surface carries the machine
+- [ADR 0154](0154-the-meshs-own-verbs-are-the-controller-seats-tools.md), [ADR 0132](0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md) — the seat half, now for every holder
+- [Design 33 — The tools the mesh answers](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/33-the-tools-the-mesh-answers.md) §3, §4; [Design 34 — The console](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/34-the-console.md) §3
+- [Issue 182](../04-ISSUES/182-a-tool-call-reaches-whichever-instance-answers-first/00-report.md)

02-DECISIONS/0160-the-mesh-issues-an-assignments-subjects-and-a-runtime-serves-what-it-is-issued.md

@@ -0,0 +1,139 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-10-01
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0159-a-tool-call-names-the-machine-and-a-holder-serves-its-seats-verbs.md
+---
+
+# 160. The mesh issues an assignment's subjects, and a runtime serves what it is issued
+
+## Context
+
+A module's code names no subject. It registers tools by name and emits events by name, and design 29
+§1 says the rest: *the module names its event and the mesh decides where it lands*. What was built
+decided it twice. The runtime derives `mesh.mod.<module>.tool.<name>` from the module's name by a rule
+compiled into it; the controller derives the same subject by the same rule compiled into it, and grants
+it. They agree because two binaries carry one convention, which is the failure design 33 §2 names for
+seat protocols: *discovery that reads a binary disagrees with the mesh the moment the two are on
+different versions*. [ADR 0159](0159-a-tool-call-names-the-machine-and-a-holder-serves-its-seats-verbs.md)
+extended the convention this morning — a second subject per tool with the machine as its last token, a
+seat's verbs served from the credential's claims — and extending it made the shape plain: every such
+change is written in the runtime and in the controller, and a module whose instances must not be
+confused is told apart by a rule in a binary rather than by the mesh that assigned it.
+
+The operator put it in one sentence: the mesh knows the subjects, the modules do not; a module should
+ask what to listen on. This record decides exactly that.
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. **Keep the convention, keep it in two places.** Cheap until the next change; every change is two
+   changes, and the mesh cannot vary a subject for one assignment without a rule for all.
+2. **Keep the convention in one place by putting it in the SDK alone**, and have the controller call
+   the SDK's rule. The controller is Go and the SDK is TypeScript; one of them would still carry a copy.
+3. **The mesh issues the subjects.** For every assignment the controller composes a membership: what
+   this instance serves, where, in which queue if any; the seat verbs it holds; where its events land;
+   what it may reach and at which subjects. It publishes it to a subject only that assignment may read,
+   kept last-per-subject so a runtime that connects late reads the current one. The runtime serves
+   exactly the list and nothing it did not receive. The grant is composed from the same membership, in
+   the same act, so the two cannot drift.
+
+## Decision
+
+**Option 3.**
+
+- **A membership per assignment.** The controller composes, for a module on a machine, one document:
+  the tools the module serves with the subject each is served on and the queue group if any; the seat
+  verbs this instance serves and their subjects; the subject each of its events lands on; what it may
+  reach — the tools it invokes, resolved to the subjects the mesh issued to those modules' instances —
+  and what it consumes. The runtime registers tools and events by name; the membership says where.
+- **Published, not written into the definition.** The membership is a message on
+  `mesh.assignment.<node>.<module>` in a stream that keeps the last per subject, like a node's
+  declaration. The controller publishes it whenever the assignment's facts change: a push, a seat
+  handover, an instance added elsewhere, an upgrade. A runtime reads the current one when it connects,
+  serves it, and keeps reading, so a change reaches a running instance as a re-subscription rather
+  than a restart.
+- **One bootstrap rule, and only one.** The credential names the node and the module; the membership's
+  subject follows from those two names and nothing else, and the account may subscribe it. Every
+  other subject is data in the membership. This is the one convention the runtime keeps, the way a
+  resolver keeps the address of a root.
+- **The grant is the membership, read the other way.** What an account may subscribe is what its
+  membership says it serves plus its own membership's subject; what it may publish is what its
+  membership says it emits and reaches. One composition yields both, so a subject the runtime serves
+  without a grant, or a grant for a subject nothing serves, cannot be written.
+- **Whether an instance answers for the module, or only for its machine, is the mesh's to decide.**
+  A module on one machine is issued the module's plain subject and its machine's. A module on several
+  is issued only its machine's unless its definition says its instances are interchangeable, a fact
+  about the software and not about the bus; then every instance is issued the plain subject in one
+  queue group as well. The console lists what the memberships say: a stateful module on two machines
+  appears once per machine; a stateless one appears once.
+- **A caller composes nothing.** The console's listing carries each tool's subject; the SDK's call by
+  name reads the subject from the caller's own membership, where the mesh wrote what it may reach. The
+  shape of a subject is the controller's business and may change without any module or runtime
+  changing.
+- **Today's shape is the shape issued first.** `mesh.mod.<module>.tool.<name>`, with the machine as the
+  last token for an instance, and `mesh.seat.<seat>.tool.<verb>` with the machine for a node-scoped
+  seat, are what the controller composes on day one, so nothing on the mesh moves when the
+  membership arrives; only who decides it moves. [ADR 0159](0159-a-tool-call-names-the-machine-and-a-holder-serves-its-seats-verbs.md)
+  stands for what it decided — a call names the machine, every answer names it, a holder serves its
+  seat — and is extended in how: those facts are now issued, not derived.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- The runtime loses its subject rule and its claims rule; it serves a list. The controller gains one
+  composition and one stream; design 25 §2 and §3 gain a line each. The console loses `toolSubject`
+  and reads subjects from the listing. The SDK's `invokeTool` reads the caller's membership.
+- A subject scheme change is a controller release and a republish of every membership, with no module
+  rebuilt — the opposite of this morning's forty-three builds.
+- A membership can differ per assignment on purpose: an instance that holds a seat serves more; an
+  instance the mesh wants quiet serves less; a module the mesh is retiring can be issued nothing and
+  told so.
+- During the move, a runtime that finds no membership for its assignment falls back to the derived
+  shape and says so in its log, so the wave of this change is a controller release followed by one
+  push, and a runtime older than the change keeps working on the convention it carries.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| A membership composed for an assignment and the grant composed for its account name the same subjects, both ways | a controller test over a module on one machine, on two, holding a seat, and declared interchangeable |
+| A runtime serves exactly the subjects its membership lists, and re-subscribes when the membership changes | a runtime test against a real bus: a membership published, served; republished with a subject removed and one added, followed |
+| A runtime with no membership says so and serves the derived shape | the same test, before any membership is published |
+| The console lists a stateful module on two machines once per machine, and composes no subject | the MCP conformance test |
+| Live: the store's databases asked of one named machine and through the seat, after a controller release and one push, with no module rebuilt | by hand |
+
+## Built, 2026-10-01
+
+> **Progressive insight — 2026-10-01.** The decision stands; these are the facts of its building.
+
+- The controller's half: mesh-controller 188 — the membership, its subject, the assignments stream
+  read directly, a module's account granted its own membership and nothing else of the stream, a
+  membership published after each push.
+- The runtime's half: mesh-tools 23 — the one address derived, the membership read and followed,
+  exactly the issued subjects served and re-served, the derived shape with a log line until one is
+  issued, a seat's verbs implemented under the seat's name and never listed as the module's, the
+  listing carrying subjects and the console composing none. A claim may now name the verbs it
+  serves for its seat (mesh-controller 186), so a holder's own tools need not be the seat's.
+- What the first roll-out taught: the controller's own grant did not name the assignments it issues,
+  so the first memberships were refused by the server and every runtime kept the derived shape —
+  which is exactly the fallback this record asked for, and exactly why nobody noticed
+  ([issue 183](../04-ISSUES/183-the-controller-could-not-publish-the-memberships-it-issued/00-report.md)).
+  The SDK's `invokeTool` still composes a subject; it reaches a membership through the runtime's
+  broker, which does, so the caller-side rule is met there and not yet in the SDK's own words.
+- Live, 14:55Z the same day, through the console: the console's runtime logged *was issued a new
+  membership; re-serving on it*; `mesh-store.databases` answered by the control node, the seat's
+  holder; `postgres.postgres_list_databases` with the machine named answered by that machine, on
+  both machines that run it; `mesh-controller.push {node}` reached the seat's verb with its own
+  argument intact. Three facts the proof taught: a runtime's first read of the stream must use the
+  subject-addressed direct get, the only form its account is granted (mesh-tools 25); a module's
+  bus credential is a minted secret written once, so a claim added to a definition reaches a running
+  module only after `module issue <module> --node <machine>` and a push (postgres, both machines);
+  and a registration under a seat the credential does not yet claim must be said and skipped, not
+  fatal (mesh-tools 26).
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0159](0159-a-tool-call-names-the-machine-and-a-holder-serves-its-seats-verbs.md) — extended: the same facts, issued rather than derived
+- [ADR 0152](0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md), [ADR 0132](0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md) — the surface and the seat's tools this applies to
+- [Design 25 — The bus on NATS](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/25-the-bus-on-nats.md) §2, §3; [Design 32 — What a module declares](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/32-what-a-module-declares.md) §1; [Design 33](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/33-the-tools-the-mesh-answers.md); [Design 34](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/34-the-console.md)

02-DECISIONS/0161-what-deserves-a-seat.md

@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-10-01
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0126-a-module-declares-its-own-seats.md
+---
+
+# 161. What deserves a seat: a role of a module is a seat, a singular fact about machines is a placement with a capacity of one, and a holder's software is the machine's
+
+## Context
+
+Three issues asked the same question from three sides. The vault provides `secret` to the whole
+mesh and claims no seat, so nothing refuses a second vault by name
+([issue 106](../04-ISSUES/106-the-vault-claims-no-seat/00-report.md)). The hub of the private
+network is a placement, `overlay place <node> --hub`, and the issue asked whether "there is exactly
+one hub" is a seat's shape ([issue 105](../04-ISSUES/105-the-hub-of-the-private-network-is-not-a-seat/00-report.md)).
+Three modules claim the one uplink seat, one per network manager a machine might run, and nothing
+checks that the holder names the manager the machine actually runs
+([issue 138](../04-ISSUES/138-two-modules-claim-one-seat-and-are-not-interchangeable/00-report.md)).
+
+Read against the code on the day of deciding:
+
+- The mesh's own seats are five by [design 26](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/26-the-seats.md)'s table and
+  four in the controller's seed: `mesh-vault` is in the table and not in the seed, and the vault's
+  definition claims nothing. The design also says `secret` is reserved; no parser or resolution rule
+  reserves it. A second provider of `secret` would be a second candidate, settled by a pin.
+- The store already keeps one hub: a unique index since the overlay's first migration, and the
+  placing command refuses a second hub naming the first. What 105 observed as silent is not.
+  [ADR 0121](0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md) decided that
+  the private network becomes a mesh-scoped seat held by a server module, with client modules —
+  the overlay is the host's own today, so that seat has nothing to be held by yet.
+- A machine's capabilities are its profile, detected by the host at enrolment and never since, and
+  resolution refuses a module on a machine lacking one it declares, naming the capability. The uplink
+  holders declare `package-manager` and `service-manager`, which every machine has.
+
+[ADR 0126](0126-a-module-declares-its-own-seats.md) gave the reason the mesh's own seats exist:
+**the mesh's own code looks them up by name.** `mesh-store` is an identifier the controller
+dereferences, not a convention. That reason decides the first question; the other two are decided
+by what a seat is — a role held by a module assignment — and by what the mesh can check.
+
+## Decision
+
+**1. A provision the mesh itself dereferences is delivered by a mesh seat its provider claims.**
+The vault's `secret` is one: the controller seals every minted credential with it. `mesh-vault` is
+the fifth seat of the mesh's own, mesh-scoped, delivering `secret`, under
+[ADR 0079](0079-the-foundation-seats-are-named-after-their-servers.md)'s convention; the vault's
+definition claims it; a second provider of `secret` is a second claimant and refused by name. The
+word *reserved* leaves design 26: the effect it described is the seat's. Every other mesh-scoped
+provision — `smtp`, `oidc-client`, `s3-bucket`, `route`, `acme-ca` and the rest — may have several
+providers, and a consumer with several and none local is a person's choice, as the glossary says.
+The test for "deserves a seat" is the question 0126 asked: does the mesh's own code find it by name?
+
+**2. A singular fact about machines is a placement with a capacity of one; a singular role of a
+module is a seat.** A seat is held by a module assignment and points at it; the hub is a machine,
+and the private network is the host's own until 0121's server and client modules exist. So the hub
+stays a placement, and what a seat would have given — refusal of a second by name, and the one
+named when asked — a placement of capacity one gives: the store keeps one (the unique index), the
+placing command refuses a second naming the one that stands, and the overlay listing names it.
+0121's seat for the private network stands, deferred with the split it needs. The rule generalises:
+a fact of the shape *exactly one machine is X* is a placement checked by the store and said by name,
+never a seat with no module to hold it.
+
+**3. A holder of a seat whose role is "speak to what this machine runs" must be the dialect the
+machine runs, and the machine says which.** The host's profile gains one capability per network
+manager found active — `uplink-networkmanager`, `uplink-systemd-networkd`, `uplink-dhcpcd`, each
+`systemctl is-active` of the manager's unit — and each uplink holder declares its own. Assignment
+then refuses the wrong holder with the refusal that already exists, naming the capability; nothing
+new is judged. The profile is detected again by every apply and travels in the report, and the
+controller keeps the latest, so a machine that switches managers is, at its next push, a machine
+whose holder lacks a capability: the plan refuses and names it, which is the one thing the machine
+is the only one to know. `node-uplink` stays one seat: its three holders are three dialects of one
+role, and the capability picks the dialect. One module speaking all three is allowed by this and
+built by nobody.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- The controller's seed gains `mesh-vault`; the seat table takes it additively at the next start,
+  as every seed row does. The vault's definition claims it, one release after the controller.
+- The uplink definitions declare their capability one release after the host reports it, or they
+  are refused on every machine in between; the order is controller (the report carries a profile),
+  host, then catalogue.
+- Design 26 loses the word *reserved* for `secret` and states rules 2 and 3; the uplink row of the
+  seat table names the capability its holders declare.
+- Issue 106 is resolved by rule 1, 105 by rule 2 with nothing to build, 138 by rule 3.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| `mesh-vault` is in the mesh's own set, mesh-scoped, delivering `secret`, and the vault claims it | a catalogue test on the default seats; registration refuses a second claimant by name (`CanHold`'s existing test, with the vault's seat) |
+| A second hub is refused naming the first, and the listing names the hub | the overlay command's test; the store's unique index |
+| A machine's profile names the network manager it runs, and is renewed by every report | a host detector test per manager; a controller test that a report carrying a profile replaces the stored one |
+| An uplink holder on a machine running another manager is refused, naming the capability | the existing capability refusal, exercised by a resolution test with a networkmanager machine and the systemd-networkd holder |
+| Live | `mesh-controller.seats` lists `mesh-vault` held by the vault on the control node; `plan` of a machine refuses the wrong uplink holder naming `uplink-<manager>` |
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0079](0079-the-foundation-seats-are-named-after-their-servers.md), [ADR 0110](0110-a-seat-is-a-module-assignment-from-a-closed-set.md), [ADR 0117](0117-a-machines-uplink-is-a-seat.md), [ADR 0121](0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md), [ADR 0126](0126-a-module-declares-its-own-seats.md)
+- [Design 26 — The seats](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/26-the-seats.md)
+- Issues [105](../04-ISSUES/105-the-hub-of-the-private-network-is-not-a-seat/00-report.md), [106](../04-ISSUES/106-the-vault-claims-no-seat/00-report.md), [138](../04-ISSUES/138-two-modules-claim-one-seat-and-are-not-interchangeable/00-report.md)

02-DECISIONS/0162-a-merge-produces-a-tiered-plan-the-mesh-keeps.md

@@ -0,0 +1,128 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-10-01
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0157-a-build-says-what-it-does-on-the-bus-as-it-happens.md
+---
+
+# 162. A merge produces a tiered plan the mesh keeps, and a module's dependencies are one relation in the catalogue
+
+## Context
+
+A merge on the forge reaches the controller as an event, and the controller asks the build
+machine for what that merge changed. Until today that meant the modules whose recorded source is
+that repository; since this afternoon it also means everything standing on what moved
+([issue 186](../04-ISSUES/186-a-release-across-repositories-is-an-order-in-a-persons-head/00-report.md)).
+Both are done inside the handler that received the event: it asks one build, waits for it, asks the
+next, and returns when the last is done. Three things followed from that shape on 2026-10-01:
+
+- The controller hears nothing else for the length of the work — twenty-five minutes for the runtime
+  image and its forty-three dependents ([issue 184](../04-ISSUES/184-a-merge-announcement-blocks-the-controllers-receive-loop/00-report.md)).
+- A controller replaced mid-merge loses the rest of the merge: the redelivered announcement reads as
+  history, and the dependents are asked by hand.
+- Nothing is deployed between builds. A merge that changes the build machine and something the build
+  machine builds asks for both in order, but the second is built by whichever build machine is running
+  — the old one, unless somebody pushed in between. The order the dependents are sorted in exists for
+  the artifacts; it says nothing about what must be *running*.
+
+And the knowledge the order is computed from is scattered: a manifest's `build.on`, the artifacts a
+build was made against, the repositories a build read, and the fact that every source-built module is
+built by the build machine, each read by a different function in the merge handler.
+
+## Decision
+
+**1. A module's dependencies are one relation in the catalogue.** `depends-on` edges, each with the
+kind of dependency on it: `stands-on` (the module's artifact is built on the other's), `packages` (the
+module's build reads the other's repository), `built-by` (the module is built by the holder of the
+build-machine seat), and `declared` (a manifest's `build.on`). The relation is answered by one query
+of the catalogue — the controller's inventory today, the catalogue seat's tool when something outside
+the controller needs it — and nothing else computes an edge. The edges are derived from facts
+recorded at two moments and written by nobody: registration records the manifest (`declared`, and
+`built-by` for anything with a source), a build's take-in records what the image was built on and
+which repositories it read (`stands-on`, `packages`). A module's first build places it by its
+declared edges alone; from its second it is placed by what was true.
+
+**The kinds are three dependencies, not one.** A *code* dependency — B packages A's source — means
+B is rebuilt whenever A changes, in the same tier: B's build needs nothing of A's first. A *build*
+dependency — B stands on A's artifact, or declares it — means B is rebuilt after A is *built*, the
+next tier, and nothing need be deployed in between. A *runtime* dependency — B is built by A — means
+B is rebuilt only after A is built *and running*, the next tier with a gate on the machines' reports.
+One cycle is real and resolved by the kinds themselves: the runtime image is built by the build
+machine, and the build machine stands on the runtime image; the image comes first, built by the
+build machine that is running, which is the only one there could be — a `built-by` edge never orders
+a module after a build machine that stands on it. A provision is not a dependency of this relation:
+a consumer binds to its provider through what the push renders, and a change to the provider's image
+changes nothing in the consumer's; a consumer whose build does read a provider's source declares it.
+"A was deployed, so restart B" is the push's domain — B is replaced when what it reads changed — and
+not the plan's.
+
+**2. A merge produces a plan, and the plan is a record.** The controller takes the modules the merge
+changed and everything reachable from them along `depends-on` edges, and sorts that set into tiers:
+tier 0 depends on nothing else in the set, tier 1 only on tier 0, and so on. The plan — the merge it
+answers, the tiers, and each module's state — is written to the store before any build is asked. The
+handler asks tier 0 and returns. Every build's outcome, taken in by the same handler that takes every
+outcome in, advances the plan it belongs to; a controller replaced mid-plan resumes it from the store.
+
+**3. A tier is done when it is built, and when what the next tier needs from it is running.** A
+module whose roll-out policy says *roll out* is sent to its machines when it moves, as today. The next
+tier is asked only once every module in this tier is built and every rolled-out module of this tier
+that a later tier is `built-by` has been applied by the machines running it — the machines' reports
+say so. A module whose policy says *record* is built and not waited for. So a merge
+touching the build machine and the controller builds the build machine, waits until it is the build
+machine that is running, and only then asks for the controller's build.
+
+**4. A plan is read where the mesh is read.** `status` lists every open plan: the merge, the tier it
+is at of how many, what it is waiting for and since when; `builds` lists the asked beside the built.
+A plan that has waited past a bound is named red there, which is the first fact of
+[issue 187](../04-ISSUES/187-the-mesh-tells-nobody-when-it-stops-working/00-report.md)'s list.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- The merge handler returns in milliseconds; the receive loop is never held by a build again. Issue
+  184's remaining cause — a handler that waits for its own work — is removed rather than worked
+  around; the bus's heartbeats stop being dropped under a merge.
+- A controller roll in the middle of a plan costs nothing: the plan is in the store and the asks are
+  in the queue (mesh-controller 194).
+- A release across repositories is a plan whose edges cross repositories; the order a person kept in
+  a work-order file is the order the tiers give. Issue 186's third fault is answered by the plan,
+  not by a separate release record.
+- The explicit `build --on <base>` stays as the way to ask for the same plan by hand.
+- A module's `build.on` remains the one place a manifest states a dependency the store cannot see.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| Dependencies are one relation, each edge with its kind | an inventory test over a fixture catalogue: a runtime image, a module on it, a module packaging the controller's source, and the build machine; the four kinds come back from one call |
+| A merge's set is sorted into tiers along the three kinds: a code dependency in the same tier, a build dependency after its base is built, a runtime dependency after the build machine; the build machine's own base first | a unit test on the tiering over the mesh's real shape: the runtime image, the build machine on it, modules built by it, a plugin declared on one, the proxy packaging the controller, an unrelated module left out; a cycle is one last tier and said |
+| Only a runtime dependency gates on deployment, and only for a module that rolls out | the same test's gate cases |
+| The plan is written before any build is asked, and the handler returns | a controller test: a merge announcement produces a plan row with its tiers and one asked build per tier-0 module, and the handler is back before any outcome |
+| An outcome advances its plan; a complete tier asks the next; a tier with a rolled-out base waits for the machines' reports | store-backed tests over a two-tier plan: the first outcome marks built; the tier's roll-out gate holds until the report; the next tier is asked after |
+| A controller restarted mid-plan resumes it | a test that opens a plan, drops the handler, and advances from the store alone |
+| `status` lists open plans and names one that waits past the bound | the status JSON test with a fixture plan |
+| Live | a catalogue merge touching a base and a dependent: the plan's tiers in `status`, the base rolled before the dependent is asked |
+
+## Built and proven live, 2026-10-01
+
+> **Progressive insight — 2026-10-01.** The decision stands; these are the facts of its building.
+
+Built in mesh-controller 197 (the relation, the plan record, the driver, `status`), 198 (`plans`),
+199 (a `built-by` edge orders and gates but never widens — the first live plan had taken the whole
+catalogue along for a controller change; `plans stop`), 200. The first merge handled by the finished
+machinery, at 18:56Z, was a controller change and produced the plan this record describes: tier 0
+the build machine; tier 1 the controller and the proxy that packages its source. The handler
+returned at once; the build machine was built, rolled, and the plan read *tier 0 built; waiting for
+builder on novox to be applied* until the machine reported; then tier 1 was asked, both built, and
+the plan read done — three minutes, read through the console with `plans`, the receive loop taking
+reports throughout. What the day between decision and proof taught is in issues
+[184](../04-ISSUES/184-a-merge-announcement-blocks-the-controllers-receive-loop/00-report.md),
+[186](../04-ISSUES/186-a-release-across-repositories-is-an-order-in-a-persons-head/00-report.md) and
+[188](../04-ISSUES/188-a-refusal-inside-on-the-network-drops-a-machine-silently/00-report.md).
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0157](0157-a-build-says-what-it-does-on-the-bus-as-it-happens.md), [ADR 0121](0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md)
+- [Design 30 — The mesh updates itself on a push](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/30-the-mesh-updates-itself-on-a-push.md)
+- Issues [184](../04-ISSUES/184-a-merge-announcement-blocks-the-controllers-receive-loop/00-report.md), [186](../04-ISSUES/186-a-release-across-repositories-is-an-order-in-a-persons-head/00-report.md), [187](../04-ISSUES/187-the-mesh-tells-nobody-when-it-stops-working/00-report.md)

02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md

@@ -0,0 +1,164 @@
+---
+topic: the mesh
+status: accepted
+date: 2026-10-01
+deciders: jochen
+reconstructed: false
+extends: 02-DECISIONS/0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md
+---
+
+# 163. Taking a module over is a comparison: what it compares, what it refuses, and what it carries
+
+## Context
+
+On an adopted machine the mesh holds what it finds until the module is taken, and taking is the
+cutover ([ADR 0100](0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md)). The whole-node flip
+is previewed and confirmed by digest; the per-module cutover, the step that actually replaces a
+running service, previews nothing. `take` names the held things the next push will replace and
+where each original is kept. It does not say how the module's version of each differs from what
+runs. Ten issues from the first migrations are the same omission seen from ten sides:
+
+- a port narrowed from everywhere to the private network, unannounced ([086](../04-ISSUES/086-taking-a-module-narrows-a-port-without-saying-so/00-report.md));
+- a configuration file replaced whole, dropping the one line that was the installation's own ([098](../04-ISSUES/098-taking-a-module-replaces-a-configuration-nobody-compared/00-report.md));
+- an image pin that had aged into a downgrade, discovered by three minutes of outage ([099](../04-ISSUES/099-a-modules-image-pin-ages-into-a-downgrade/00-report.md));
+- a secret minted for a service that already had one, with no way to carry the existing value in because it was a required secret and not the module's own ([100](../04-ISSUES/100-a-minted-secret-cannot-be-the-one-the-service-already-uses/00-report.md));
+- a container moved onto the module's own network, out of reach of the neighbour that called it by name ([101](../04-ISSUES/101-taking-a-service-reached-by-container-name-cuts-its-neighbours-off/00-report.md));
+- a resource whose target changed, leaving the old container running with no record naming it ([097](../04-ISSUES/097-a-resource-that-changes-target-leaves-the-old-one-behind/00-report.md));
+- a volume path that changed without the running container noticing, because the host does not compare that field ([126](../04-ISSUES/126-a-volume-path-is-not-in-the-spec-comparison/00-report.md));
+- a build that deployed at once because the module's policy said so, racing a data move ([126](../04-ISSUES/126-a-volume-path-is-not-in-the-spec-comparison/00-report.md));
+- a setting accepted where it was set and refusing the whole machine where it was read ([096](../04-ISSUES/096-a-setting-that-cannot-work-is-stored-and-stops-the-node/00-report.md));
+- a module that could not take over what genesis raised, because the two differed in name, network, data and image ([090](../04-ISSUES/090-the-forge-module-does-not-take-over-the-forge-genesis-raised/00-report.md));
+- a successor that could not stand beside its predecessor at all, answered by [ADR 0104](0104-a-provision-may-be-answered-by-an-adapter-to-the-predecessor.md)'s adapter ([093](../04-ISSUES/093-the-successor-proxy-cannot-serve-what-the-predecessor-still-serves/00-report.md)).
+
+What the host records of a found thing is enough to compare from: a file's original, kept, with
+its digest, mode and owner; a container's id and whether it ran; whether anything changed it
+since. What it does not yet record is what a comparison needs most: the found container's image
+and when that image was made, the networks it is on and who else is on them, what it mounts, what
+it publishes. And the controller's rule that a machine is told everything or nothing turns one
+impossible statement into a machine nobody can talk to.
+
+## Decision
+
+**1. A take is previewed, and the preview is a comparison.** For every held thing the module would
+replace, `take` puts what runs beside what the module declares and says the difference:
+
+- a **container**: its image against the module's, with each image's creation date so older and
+  newer have a meaning; its name; its networks, and the other containers on each found network
+  that is not the module's; its published ports and the reach of each, found firewall and guard
+  included; its mounts against the module's volumes and paths;
+- a **file**: the kept original against the declared content, as a difference, not two digests;
+- a **secret** the module takes that the mesh minted and nobody accepted, when the service's data
+  was found — a service that already runs already has a value;
+- the module's **settings** on that machine, composed against its definition.
+
+`take` without `--yes` prints the comparison and stops; `take --yes <digest>` cuts over exactly
+what was previewed, the way the flip is confirmed, and a preview whose account of the machine is
+older than the flip allows is refused the same way. The host supplies the facts in its report of
+what it holds: the found container's image and its creation date, its networks and their members,
+its mounts and published ports.
+
+**2. Three differences refuse by default, each overridden by naming it.** An image **older** than
+the one running, by creation date — `--downgrade`, said once and recorded. A declared file that
+**differs** from the kept original — `--replace <path>`, or the module declares the file partially
+and writes into it ([ADR 0102](0102-the-mesh-writes-into-a-shared-file-never-over-it.md)), which is
+the right answer wherever the file is the service's own and the format allows it. A **minted,
+unaccepted secret** for a service whose data was found — accept the value first, or `--mint
+<name>` to say the service shall take a new one. Two differences are said and not refused: a port
+whose reach **narrows**, and a found network whose other members may reach the container **by
+name**, each member named; both are the operator's to weigh, and the words are there to weigh them.
+
+**3. A secret the mesh would mint may be accepted instead, own or required.** `secret accept`
+reaches a module's required secrets, not only its own: the value is a fact about the machine, and
+the mesh's job at a take is to learn it. The accepted value is sealed to the module as a minted one
+would be, and the provider that would have minted it is told it has one. Whether one accepted
+value should reach every consumer of a provider at once is [issue 165](../04-ISSUES/165-one-accepted-value-must-be-accepted-once-per-consumer/00-report.md)'s
+question and the next group's.
+
+**4. A taken container may keep a found network, for a while, by a setting.** A per-machine
+setting names a found network the module's container also joins, so a neighbour that resolves it
+by name keeps resolving it. It is migration scaffolding in the sense of
+[ADR 0104](0104-a-provision-may-be-answered-by-an-adapter-to-the-predecessor.md): assigned only on an
+adopted machine, reported while it stands, removed when the neighbours are taken, and the preview
+names it. Taking a group of modules at once is not decided here; the setting makes the order free.
+
+**5. The host compares every field it writes, and removes what it can no longer name.** A
+container is current when every field the host would write agrees with the one running — volumes
+and paths included; a field the host cannot compare recreates rather than passes. The host's
+record keeps a resource's former targets: a container or file the host **wrote** under a name or
+path the declaration no longer names is removed on the next apply and said; what was **found** is
+never removed, as ADR 0100 says. And the host answers the question nothing answered on
+2026-09-23: its report lists what runs on the machine that the mesh neither wrote nor holds —
+containers and listeners — as *strays*, so a thing left behind is seen the day it is left.
+
+**6. A setting is judged where it is stored, and an impossible one costs a module, not a machine.**
+Storing a setting composes it against the module's current definition and refuses with the node,
+module, layer and key when it cannot work. A definition that later moves under a stored setting
+makes composition leave *that module* out of the machine's declaration — its held things kept, its
+containers untouched — and say the statement by name; the machine is still told everything else.
+A machine is told everything or nothing about what it *is* told; what it is not told is said.
+
+**7. What genesis raises, it raises as the module that succeeds it declares** — name, network,
+data directory and image — so the module adopts it by the found rule that already exists, and a
+module meant to succeed a bootstrap service that it cannot adopt is a fault of genesis, found by a
+test that raises and then assigns. **`build` says when a policy will act on its result**, so a
+person choreographing a data move knows which module will not wait; under
+[ADR 0162](0162-a-merge-produces-a-tiered-plan-the-mesh-keeps.md) the roll-out is the plan's, and
+the plan says it too.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- `take` becomes the per-module twin of the flip: preview, digest, confirm. The flip's own preview
+  gains the same comparisons for every module it takes.
+- The host's report of what it holds grows by the found container's image and creation date,
+  networks and members, mounts and published ports; its store keeps former targets and strays.
+- Issues 086, 098, 099, 100, 101 close on rule 1 and 2; 097 and 126 on rule 5; 096 on rule 6;
+  090 on rule 7; 093 is closed by ADR 0104's adapter, which runs.
+- Nothing here changes what an adopted machine keeps or when: found stays held, held is never
+  removed, the original is kept before anything is written.
+
+## How this is checked
+
+| Rule | Checked by |
+|---|---|
+| The host reports a found container's image and creation date, networks and their members, mounts and published ports | host unit tests over a fake runtime; the adoption bed's report |
+| `take` without `--yes` previews every held thing's difference and changes nothing; `--yes` with the digest cuts over; a stale account is refused | controller tests over a fixture report: a differing file, an older image, a narrowed port, a shared network, a minted secret |
+| An older image, a differing file and a minted secret for found data refuse without their override | the same tests |
+| A found network kept by a setting is joined, reported and named in the preview | a host test and a controller resolution test |
+| `secret accept` takes a required secret | an inventory test; the provider is told |
+| Every container field is compared; a former target the host wrote is removed and said; what was found is not | host tests: a volume path change recreates; a renamed container's predecessor is removed; a found one under the old name is kept |
+| Strays are reported | a host test over a fake runtime with a container nobody declared |
+| A setting that cannot compose is refused where stored, naming node, module, layer, key; a definition moving under one leaves that module out and says so | controller tests |
+| Genesis raises the forge as its module declares it | a genesis test that raises, assigns, and finds the module holding rather than raising a second |
+| Live | the next cutover on an adopted machine: `take` shows the comparison, refuses the downgrade if there is one, and the service keeps its configuration and its secret |
+
+## Built, 2026-10-02
+
+> **Progressive insight — 2026-10-02.** The decision stands; these are the facts of its building.
+
+Built across mesh-host 63 and 64 and mesh-controller 201, 202 and the pull request that followed
+them. Rule 1: `take` previews every held thing's comparison and ends with a digest; `take --yes
+<digest>` acts on exactly that preview, and a changed preview or an account older than the flip
+allows is refused, as the flip's are. A published port's reach is said as the machine reported it,
+behind the found firewall whose rules are not read. Rule 2: an older image, a differing file and a
+minted, unaccepted secret for found data refuse, overridden by `--downgrade`, `--replace <path>` and
+`--mint <name>`; the secrets a module holds on a machine are read with where each came from. Rule 3:
+`secret accept --provider` reaches a required secret. Rule 4: the per-machine setting is `networks`,
+a container id to the found networks it keeps; judged for an adopted machine only, joined by the host
+after the container runs, part of the container's spec, named in the preview. Rule 5: the host's
+facts, former targets and strays. Rule 6: one judgement, run where a setting is stored and where a
+machine is composed; a module whose stored setting its definition can no longer compose is left out
+of the declaration, the envelope says so, the host keeps that module's things, and `plan` and `push`
+say it by name. A key that reaches nothing is refused where stored and said by `plan`, and never
+costs a module. Rule 7: genesis raises the forge under the module's container name, with its image
+digest and its data directory; the network is the one difference left, said by the take, because the
+bootstrap forge reaches the store on the machine's loopback.
+
+**Not yet proven live.** Every machine of this mesh is converged, so the table's last row — a take
+on an adopted machine — waits for the next adoption. What is live is what the rows above it check.
+Issues 086, 098, 099, 100 and 101 stay located until that row is read.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0100](0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md), [ADR 0102](0102-the-mesh-writes-into-a-shared-file-never-over-it.md), [ADR 0103](0103-what-an-adopted-node-holds-and-what-its-guard-refuses.md), [ADR 0104](0104-a-provision-may-be-answered-by-an-adapter-to-the-predecessor.md), [ADR 0162](0162-a-merge-produces-a-tiered-plan-the-mesh-keeps.md)
+- [Design 05 — The node host](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/05-the-node-host.md), [Design 09 — The node lifecycle](../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/09-the-node-lifecycle.md)
+- Issues 086, 090, 093, 096, 097, 098, 099, 100, 101, 126

02-DECISIONS/README.md

@@ -48,6 +48,31 @@ form above and dated no earlier than the record's own `date:` — an unmarked ed
 violation the reviewer looks for in the diff, and a marked one is legible in the record itself.
 The git history is the backstop, not the record of intent; the note is the record of intent.
 
+## A pointer back from what a record changes
+
+A new record naming an old one is not enough. **Where a record changes a mechanism an older record
+states — without reversing the decision, so no supersession — the older record gets a dated note
+saying where its mechanism now lives.** A reader arrives at the old record by following a citation,
+and finds text that is still the decision and no longer the method; nothing in it says a later record
+moved the method, and the new record is not in their hands.
+
+> **The mechanism changed — YYYY-MM-DD, by ADR NNNN.** What still stands, what moved,
+> and why.
+
+Three examples of the shape, all found by being missed: ADR 0066 still described a routed name being
+written into every container after 0148 replaced that with resolution; ADR 0047 still said a module's
+code runs in a container after 0150 made it a supervised process; and ADR 0016 still read as though the
+lab were the test bed after 0149 said the live mesh is. Each was a citation leading to the wrong
+answer, in a record that was not wrong about anything it decided.
+
+**This is not machine-checked, and it cannot be from `extends:` alone.** 102 records extend another and
+87 name a parent that does not mention them, which is correct: extending usually means building on a
+context, and a one-directional pointer is the right shape for that. What needs a note is the narrower
+case where the parent's own text has gone stale, and which case that is, is a judgement — so it is a
+rule for the author and the reviewer, and the diff is where it is caught. Making it mechanical would
+mean a record declaring the relationship in its frontmatter, which is a change to the record schema and
+has not been decided.
+
 The records run in the order the decisions were taken, oldest first.
 
 **Every decision is a record.** There is no ledger and no index file — if a decision is worth
@@ -135,10 +160,23 @@ python3 00-META/checks/index.py            fail if stale
 - **0116** — [The bus is built in five steps, and the protocol moves with it](0116-the-bus-is-built-in-five-steps.md)
 - **0119** — [A taken tunnel's predecessor is retired once the take is proven](0119-a-taken-tunnels-predecessor-is-retired.md)
 - **0125** — [The bus is the only broker](0125-the-bus-is-the-only-broker.md)  *(superseded)*
-- **0127** — [AMQP is a provision, not the bus](0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md)
+- **0127** — [AMQP is a provision, not the bus](0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md)  *(superseded)*
 - **0128** — [The mesh bus is required, not ambient](0128-the-mesh-bus-is-required-not-ambient.md)
 - **0129** — [A seat carries the protocol of its role](0129-a-seat-carries-the-protocol-of-its-role.md)
 - **0130** — [The predecessor is ending, and its broker goes with it](0130-the-predecessor-is-ending-and-its-broker-goes-with-it.md)
+- **0131** — [Everything on the mesh speaks to the broker seat, and AMQP is not a provision](0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md)
+- **0132** — [A seat carries the tools its holder must serve](0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md)
+- **0134** — [The mesh says what it applied](0134-the-mesh-says-what-it-applied.md)
+- **0142** — [The mesh delivers its own components as binaries, not as container images](0142-the-mesh-delivers-its-own-components-as-binaries.md)
+- **0154** — [The mesh's own verbs are the mesh-controller seat's tools, and which verbs those are](0154-the-meshs-own-verbs-are-the-controller-seats-tools.md)
+- **0156** — [An artifact is what a build produces, the artifact store serves every kind, and its seat is named for its scope](0156-an-artifact-is-what-a-build-produces-and-the-store-is-named-for-its-scope.md)
+- **0157** — [A build says what it does on the bus, as it happens](0157-a-build-says-what-it-does-on-the-bus-as-it-happens.md)
+- **0158** — [A provider with one credential shares it with every consumer, and the vault remakes it for all of them at once](0158-a-provider-with-one-credential-shares-it-with-every-consumer.md)
+- **0159** — [A tool call names the machine it is for, every answer says which machine answered, and a holder's runtime serves its seat's verbs](0159-a-tool-call-names-the-machine-and-a-holder-serves-its-seats-verbs.md)
+- **0160** — [The mesh issues an assignment's subjects, and a runtime serves what it is issued](0160-the-mesh-issues-an-assignments-subjects-and-a-runtime-serves-what-it-is-issued.md)
+- **0161** — [What deserves a seat: a role of a module is a seat, a singular fact about machines is a placement with a capacity of one, and a holder's software is the machine's](0161-what-deserves-a-seat.md)
+- **0162** — [A merge produces a tiered plan the mesh keeps, and a module's dependencies are one relation in the catalogue](0162-a-merge-produces-a-tiered-plan-the-mesh-keeps.md)
+- **0163** — [Taking a module over is a comparison: what it compares, what it refuses, and what it carries](0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md)
 
 ### Its tiers, from the bottom up
 
@@ -170,6 +208,8 @@ python3 00-META/checks/index.py            fail if stale
 - **0108** — [A route carries the policy applied to a request, and names a secret rather than holding one](0108-a-route-carries-the-policy-applied-to-a-request.md)
 - **0109** — [A package registry seat is one per ecosystem, not one for all of them](0109-a-package-registry-seat-is-one-per-ecosystem.md)
 - **0126** — [A module declares its own seats; the mesh reserves its own](0126-a-module-declares-its-own-seats.md)
+- **0148** — [The mesh's names are resolved, not copied into every container](0148-the-meshs-names-are-resolved-not-copied-into-containers.md)
+- **0151** — [A route's internal name is composed under the node that serves it](0151-a-routes-internal-name-is-composed-under-the-node-that-serves-it.md)
 
 ### What runs on them, and how it gets there
 
@@ -202,15 +242,31 @@ python3 00-META/checks/index.py            fail if stale
 - **0091** — [A mount is declared, and there are three things it can be](0091-a-mount-is-declared-three-ways.md)
 - **0099** — [A step that runs once names what it reads, and runs again when it changed](0099-a-step-that-runs-once-names-what-it-reads.md)
 - **0110** — [A seat is held by one assignment, from a closed set, and it may deliver a provision](0110-a-seat-is-a-module-assignment-from-a-closed-set.md)
-- **0112** — [A module definition names no node, no mesh and no path: everything it needs is a requirement the mesh resolves](0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md)  *(proposed)*
-- **0113** — [The vault makes every shared secret, a provider makes resources and data, and the mesh carries both](0113-the-vault-makes-every-secret.md)  *(proposed)*
-- **0114** — [A credential two parties hold rotates over two credentials; one a single party holds rotates in place, staged; and retiring a credential never removes what it reached](0114-a-shared-credential-rotates-over-two-credentials.md)  *(proposed)*
-- **0115** — [One assignment of a module per node: the module's name is the assignment's identity](0115-one-assignment-of-a-module-per-node.md)  *(proposed)*
+- **0112** — [A module definition names no node, no mesh and no path: everything it needs is a requirement the mesh resolves](0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md)
+- **0113** — [The vault makes every shared secret, a provider makes resources and data, and the mesh carries both](0113-the-vault-makes-every-secret.md)
+- **0114** — [A credential two parties hold rotates over two credentials; one a single party holds rotates in place, staged; and retiring a credential never removes what it reached](0114-a-shared-credential-rotates-over-two-credentials.md)
+- **0115** — [One assignment of a module per node: the module's name is the assignment's identity](0115-one-assignment-of-a-module-per-node.md)
 - **0117** — [A machine's uplink is a seat: the mesh configures the manager, never the link](0117-a-machines-uplink-is-a-seat.md)
 - **0118** — [Undeclaring removes what the mesh made, and gives a unit back the state it was found in](0118-undeclaring-gives-a-unit-back-the-state-it-was-found-in.md)
 - **0120** — [A roster fact carries its format as a template: the mesh owns the data, the module owns the format](0120-a-roster-fact-carries-its-format-as-a-template.md)
 - **0121** — [A system seat is named for its scope, and a module may define its own](0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md)
 - **0122** — [A seat is data the controller owns, and a rename is a database update](0122-a-seat-is-data-a-rename-is-a-database-update.md)
+- **0133** — [A module owns its migrations, and the mesh owns when they run](0133-a-module-owns-its-migrations-and-the-mesh-owns-when-they-run.md)  *(superseded)*
+- **0135** — [A module version prepares its state before it runs](0135-a-module-version-prepares-its-state-before-it-runs.md)
+- **0136** — [A step gates its module, not the machine](0136-a-step-gates-its-module-not-the-machine.md)
+- **0137** — [A machine says which networks it routes](0137-a-machine-says-which-networks-it-routes.md)  *(superseded)*
+- **0138** — [An assignment binds an endpoint and says how far it reaches](0138-an-assignment-binds-an-endpoint-and-says-how-far-it-reaches.md)
+- **0139** — [A network is forwarded because a module declared it](0139-a-network-is-forwarded-because-a-module-declared-it.md)  *(superseded)*
+- **0140** — [The filter constrains what arrives from outside, and says nothing about a machine's own guests](0140-the-filter-constrains-what-arrives-from-outside.md)
+- **0141** — [The host delivers its own successor, and versions live side by side](0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md)
+- **0143** — [A consumer verifies the grant it is given](0143-a-consumer-verifies-the-grant-it-is-given.md)  *(superseded)*
+- **0144** — [Anything on a machine may call anything on it, and that is the whole of "local"](0144-anything-on-a-machine-may-call-anything-on-it.md)
+- **0145** — [A module checks what the mesh claims is reachable, and it checks itself](0145-a-module-checks-what-the-mesh-claims-is-reachable.md)  *(superseded)*
+- **0146** — [Connectivity is checked by name, per hosting form, with a valid certificate](0146-connectivity-is-checked-by-name-per-hosting-form.md)
+- **0147** — [A module anchors the mesh's authority on a machine, and takes it away again](0147-a-module-anchors-the-meshs-authority.md)
+- **0150** — [A module's own code runs as supervised processes under the module's one account](0150-a-modules-own-code-runs-as-supervised-processes-under-one-account.md)
+- **0152** — [The operator's surface is a module the mesh assigns: the console](0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md)
+- **0155** — [A definition names no installation: how that is checked, and the three ways a value that did gets out](0155-a-definition-names-no-installation-and-how-that-is-checked.md)
 
 ### How it is built
 
@@ -220,9 +276,9 @@ python3 00-META/checks/index.py            fail if stale
 - **0014** — [No workspace — each module is a standalone package consuming published dependencies](0014-no-npm-workspace.md)
 - **0015** — [Applications live in their own repository; the monorepo is for the mesh](0015-applications-live-in-their-own-repository.md)
 - **0016** — [The lab](0016-the-lab.md)
-- **0037** — [Where a module lives](0037-where-a-module-lives.md)  *(proposed)*
+- **0037** — [Where a module lives](0037-where-a-module-lives.md)
 - **0039** — [What the SDK holds, and what it refuses](0039-what-the-sdk-holds-and-refuses.md)
-- **0068** — [The lab takes requests, one at a time, and runs each from its own copy](0068-the-lab-takes-requests.md)  *(proposed)*
+- **0068** — [The lab takes requests, one at a time, and runs each from its own copy](0068-the-lab-takes-requests.md)  *(superseded)*
 - **0069** — [A module is a repository and a path within it](0069-a-module-is-a-repository-and-a-path.md)
 - **0076** — [The SDK is a published package, and the toolchain resolves it by version](0076-the-sdk-is-a-published-package.md)
 - **0082** — [The registry is reached by name, and the overlay is its security](0082-the-registry-is-reached-by-name-and-trusted-by-the-overlay.md)
@@ -231,6 +287,7 @@ python3 00-META/checks/index.py            fail if stale
 - **0097** — [A vendor image is a declared build input, and a recipe fetches nothing undeclared](0097-a-vendor-image-is-a-declared-build-input.md)
 - **0107** — [Persistent data is a directory bind, never a named volume](0107-persistent-data-is-a-directory-bind-never-a-named-volume.md)
 - **0111** — [A build source is on the mesh's git seat, or it is an external repository](0111-a-build-source-is-on-the-git-seat-or-external.md)
+- **0149** — [The live mesh is the test bed](0149-the-live-mesh-is-the-test-bed.md)
 
 ### How it is checked
 
@@ -251,5 +308,6 @@ python3 00-META/checks/index.py            fail if stale
 - **0034** — [The local account owns the mesh, and a web application's login is not that](0034-the-local-account-owns-the-mesh.md)
 - **0080** — [The development cycle is checked, not trusted](0080-the-development-cycle-is-checked.md)
 - **0081** — [A decision nothing cites is not yet in the chain](0081-a-decision-nothing-cites-is-not-yet-in-the-chain.md)
+- **0153** — [The record is read by a module the mesh assigns, and the console lists it](0153-the-record-is-read-by-a-module-and-the-console-lists-it.md)
 
 <!-- index:end -->

03-DESIGN/00-as-is/07-knowledge.md

@@ -1,78 +1,58 @@
 ---
 layer: as-is
 status: implemented
-code: [hal]
-updated: 2026-08-23
-decisions: []
+code: [mesh-catalog modules/records, mesh-catalog modules/mesh-console]
+updated: 2026-09-30
+decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0025-the-design-record-is-read-not-copied.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0153-the-record-is-read-by-a-module-and-the-console-lists-it.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md
 ---
 
 # Knowledge
 
-The mesh keeps two knowledge stores. They are not redundant, and knowing which is which is the
-difference between finding an answer in one search and rediscovering it over several hours.
+**The mesh keeps no knowledge store.** What it knows is what its modules answer, and the way a person
+or an agent asks is the console's tool list on the machine they sit at
+([13 — The console](13-the-console.md)). This document used to describe two stores; it is rewritten
+because neither exists from the mesh's side, and an as-is document that describes what is gone is a
+brochure.
 
-## The operational memory
+## What was here, and where it went
 
-A store of operational notes, written and read by whoever — human or agent — is working. Each
-note is a slug and a body: how something works, what went wrong, what the fix was, what
-assumption turned out to be false.
+Until the cut-over of 2026-09-28 the predecessor ran two stores: an operational memory of notes
+indexed on symptoms, and a structured archive of governed documents with a librarian approving
+promotion. Both were reached through the predecessor's tool server over the bus the mesh removed
+([issue 147](../../04-ISSUES/147-the-operators-tools-still-dial-the-bus-that-was-removed/00-report.md)).
+Nothing in the mesh reaches them now, and nothing in the mesh has replaced them: there is no note
+store, no archive, no librarian, and the lessons of the last days were written into this repository by
+hand. That is a gap, and it is stated here rather than papered over. What replaces a symptom-indexed
+memory, if anything does, is undecided.
 
-It is indexed on **symptoms**. The entry someone needs is usually titled after the error they
-are staring at, which is why the standing instruction is to search the literal error text
-before forming a hypothesis rather than after one fails.
+## The record
 
-Its content is overwhelmingly the record of previous debugging: a large body of
-troubleshooting entries, module conventions, and standing notes about work that is open. It is
-the mesh's institutional memory of *what has already gone wrong*.
+**The design record is read where it is written.** Since 2026-09-30 a module, `records`, keeps a
+checkout of this repository from the forge — cloned from the `git` seat, reset to the origin on every
+merge the forge announces and every ten minutes — and answers over the bus: where a phrase appears as
+written, one document whole, what a folder holds, and where the checkout stands, each naming the
+commit it read. Which repository it reads is a setting on its assignment; the module names no mesh.
 
-The cost of skipping it is documented in the mesh's own record: entries have been rediscovered
-from scratch, over hours, in sessions where the search was skipped because the trail felt
-confident. It fires hardest on familiar ground, not unfamiliar ground.
+It is listed by the console beside every other tool, with a description that says to search the
+literal words of a symptom before forming a hypothesis. That is what
+[ADR 0025](../../02-DECISIONS/0025-the-design-record-is-read-not-copied.md) meant by *beside
+everything else*, in a mesh with no store to be beside
+([ADR 0153](../../02-DECISIONS/0153-the-record-is-read-by-a-module-and-the-console-lists-it.md)).
 
-## The structured archive
+Nothing is copied. A checkout lags the source by seconds after an announced merge and by minutes
+otherwise, and says so.
 
-A second store, structured rather than flat: spaces, pages, revisions, tiers, and full-text
-search. Where the operational memory is a note, this is a document with an owner and a
-lifecycle.
+## The constitution
 
-Content is promoted through tiers — private, then team, then platform — with a librarian agent
-owning approval and promotion at the boundary. Proposals to edit are reviewed rather than
-applied.
-
-This is where the mesh's **governed** documents live, including the constitution injected into
-design sessions ([ADR 0020](../../02-DECISIONS/0020-the-mesh-is-governed-by-a-constitution.md)).
-
-## Why both
-
-The distinction is by lifecycle, not by subject.
-
-| Operational memory | Structured archive |
-|---|---|
-| Written the moment something is learned | Written deliberately, reviewed |
-| Flat, symptom-indexed | Structured, tiered, owned |
-| Anyone writes; nothing approves | Promotion is approved |
-| Truth is "this happened" | Truth is "this is agreed" |
-
-Collapsing them would cost one of the two properties: either every hard-won note waits for
-review, or governed documents can be changed by anyone mid-incident.
+[`00-META/how-we-build.md`](../../00-META/how-we-build.md) is the source of the mesh constitution
+([ADR 0021](../../02-DECISIONS/0021-hq-is-the-source-of-the-constitution.md)). The page it used to be
+synchronised into lived in the predecessor's archive and is unreachable; the constitution today is
+read from this repository, through the same module, and playbook 05's sync has nothing to write to.
 
 ## Where this repository sits
 
-This repository is a third thing, and the objection was raised when it was created: a fourth
-knowledge system repeats the mistake the split was made to fix.
-
-The answer given was **indexing, not location** — that these documents are indexed into the
-knowledge base so that a symptom search returns them alongside everything else. One source,
-many surfaces.
-
-**That indexing does not currently exist.** A search for this repository's content returns
-nothing. The claim is load-bearing for the decision to separate the repository at all, and
-until it is true, this repository is exactly the fourth knowledge system the objection
-described. Recorded here because it is a statement about how the mesh's knowledge actually
-works today, and as [`04-ISSUES/006`](../../04-ISSUES/006-hq-is-not-indexed-into-the-knowledge-base/00-report.md).
-
-## The librarian
-
-A single agent owns the archive's approvals and promotions. Its approval capabilities have at
-times not been reachable as tools, which does not affect the operational memory but does mean
-promotion stops silently — the store keeps accepting proposals that nothing can approve.
+A third thing beside two that are gone, which makes it the first: the one governed record the mesh
+has, public, read by a module the mesh assigns, and edited nowhere else.

03-DESIGN/00-as-is/12-the-seats.md

@@ -82,6 +82,22 @@ to clone.
 The schema column added for this defaults to empty rather than null, because "not on a seat" is a
 real answer, so every row recorded before the change keeps exactly the meaning it had.
 
+## A seat's protocol is on its row, and the controller serves its own
+
+*Since 2026-09-30 ([ADR 0154](../../02-DECISIONS/0154-the-meshs-own-verbs-are-the-controller-seats-tools.md)).*
+The `seat` table carries `accepts`, `emits` and `serves`; `serves` holds each verb with its description
+and input schema. The rows were seeded from the compiled defaults the first time a controller with the
+columns migrated, and each later migration adds any verb the defaults name that a row lacks, never
+removing one. `UseSeats` still falls back to the compiled protocol for a row with none, which after the
+first seeding is no row.
+
+The `mesh-controller` seat serves twelve verbs — `tools`, `status`, `nodes`, `node`, `modules`, `seats`,
+`builds`, `plan`, `assign`, `unassign`, `push`, `build` — on `mesh.seat.mesh-controller.tool.<verb>`,
+each answered by the controller running that command in its own binary and returning what it printed.
+A module claiming a mesh seat with verbs must list them under `tools` or registration refuses it by
+name. A node-scoped seat's tool is `mesh.seat.<seat>.tool.<verb>.<node>`; no node-scoped seat declares
+one yet.
+
 ## Where this differs from the design
 
 **Capacity is not implemented.** The design's vocabulary has a seat with a capacity, and a

03-DESIGN/00-as-is/13-the-console.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+---
+layer: as-is
+status: implemented
+code: [mesh-catalog modules/mesh-console, mesh-tools src/mesh.ts, mesh-tools src/http.ts, mesh-tools src/runtime.ts, mesh-controller internal/broker, mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/check.go, mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/seatverbs.go]
+updated: 2026-09-30
+decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0095-the-control-plane-is-the-way-to-ask-a-module.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0037-where-a-module-lives.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0154-the-meshs-own-verbs-are-the-controller-seats-tools.md
+---
+
+# The console, as it runs
+
+**The mesh's tools reach a person through a module the mesh assigned to their machine.** Since
+2026-09-30 a workstation that is a node can be assigned `mesh-console`; the mesh mints a bus account
+`<node>.mesh-console`, seals its credential to the machine, and the container binds
+`127.0.0.1:<port>` with the port the mesh assigned for the manifest's declared one. An agent on the
+machine is pointed at `http://127.0.0.1:<port>/mcp` and sees the mesh's tools; a person uses the same
+endpoint. Nothing on the machine holds a credential a person had to carry.
+
+## What it answers
+
+`initialize`, `tools/list`, `tools/call`, over HTTP, one JSON body per request, no session and no event
+stream. `tools/list` is what the running modules answered: every tool runtime built on or after that day
+serves a `tools` verb for its module, and the console asks the catalogue for the roster and each module
+for its tools. A module that did not answer is named in the list's `_meta.notAnswering`. On the day it
+shipped that was 36 of 51 modules — those that serve no tools at all, and those whose rebuilt runtime the
+mesh records rather than rolls out — and 62 tools from the rest.
+
+`tools/call` reaches any tool by `<module>.<tool>`, listed or not. The console's grant is `*`, so what it
+may call is every tool on the mesh; its account may publish nothing else and subscribes nothing.
+
+## The mesh's own verbs
+
+*Since 2026-09-30 evening ([ADR 0154](../../02-DECISIONS/0154-the-meshs-own-verbs-are-the-controller-seats-tools.md)).*
+The console asks the `mesh-controller` seat's `tools` verb beside the modules and lists every role's
+tools as `<seat>.<verb>` — `mesh-controller.status`, `mesh-controller.push` and the other ten. A call
+to `<prefix>.<name>` reaches the seat when the prefix is a seat declaring that verb, and the module
+otherwise; `seat:<seat>.<verb>` says so outright. When the control plane does not answer, the list
+names `mesh-controller (seat)` as not answering and carries the modules' tools regardless. The
+`mesh-controller` *module* is always named as not answering: it serves no module tools, only its seat's.
+
+## Around it
+
+- **`invokes`** in a manifest is the grant. It is composed into the bus's user list exactly as a
+  person's account is; the console is the only module that declares it.
+- **`module check <file|dir>…`** on the controller's binary judges a manifest with no mesh: the strict
+  parse, every per-manifest problem, and the rules between the manifests given. It prints what it cannot
+  judge without a store rather than refusing. The console's own manifest was the first thing checked
+  with it, and the whole catalogue passes.
+- **The person's client remains.** `operator issue` and `mesh tools|call|mcp` with a credential file
+  still work, for a machine that is not a node and for a mesh not yet able to assign anything.
+  `mesh tools --console <url>` goes through a running console with no credential; it is covered by the
+  runtime repository's tests and was not exercised on the live mesh.
+
+## What shipped bent
+
+- A module registered by hand from the catalogue with `--source <url> --path modules/<m>` records a URL,
+  not a place on the git seat: `--self` takes the forge path form (`<owner>/<repository>`), which the
+  operator did not pass. The rebuild-on-merge matched the URL anyway.
+- Modules whose upgrade policy is *record* — the forge among them — answered `tools` only once
+  something pushed their rebuilt runtime; until then they are listed as not answering while still
+  callable. That is the policy doing what it says, not a fault of the console.

03-DESIGN/00-as-is/README.md

@@ -15,12 +15,13 @@ Where the two disagree, the implementation wins and the disagreement is stated.
 | [`04-delivery.md`](04-delivery.md) | Push to running: the three silos, levels, and what a green pipeline proves |
 | [`05-runtime-and-installation.md`](05-runtime-and-installation.md) | The node runtime, its modes, and how a node comes into being |
 | [`06-configuration-and-secrets.md`](06-configuration-and-secrets.md) | Managed files, value resolution, and where secrets live |
-| [`07-knowledge.md`](07-knowledge.md) | The two knowledge stores, and what each is for |
+| [`07-knowledge.md`](07-knowledge.md) | The mesh keeps no store: what it knows is what modules answer, and the record is read by one |
 | [`08-agents-and-work.md`](08-agents-and-work.md) | Agents as employees, tasks, workflows, and the meeting model |
 | [`09-interfaces-and-observability.md`](09-interfaces-and-observability.md) | How the mesh is reached and watched — tools, board, proxy, health, thoughts |
 | [`10-module-catalogue.md`](10-module-catalogue.md) | The catalogue's shape, and what its shape says |
 | [`11-the-lab.md`](11-the-lab.md) | The lab — the first piece of the new shape that exists, and what it does not yet do |
 | [`12-the-seats.md`](12-the-seats.md) | The seats the mesh defines, who holds one, and where a seat changes resolution |
+| [`13-the-console.md`](13-the-console.md) | The mesh's tools on the machine a person sits at, served by a module the mesh assigned there |
 
 ## What these documents are not
 

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/05-the-node-host.md

@@ -2,8 +2,10 @@
 layer: to-be
 status: in-progress
 code: [mesh-host]
-updated: 2026-09-22
+updated: 2026-10-02
 decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0102-the-mesh-writes-into-a-shared-file-never-over-it.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0103-what-an-adopted-node-holds-and-what-its-guard-refuses.md
@@ -152,6 +154,28 @@ checked:* unit tests hold the host to keeping a found file and container, conver
 taken, never removing a held file and reporting one that changed; the adoption bed asserts a found
 file byte for byte unchanged until its module is taken.
 
+**What the host says of a found container, and what it removes** — revision, 2026-10-01
+([ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md)). Its report of a held
+container carries the image and the image's creation date, the networks it is on and the other
+containers on each, its mounts and its published ports — the facts a take compares. The host compares
+every field it writes before calling a container current, volumes and paths included; its record keeps
+a resource's former targets, removes a container or file it wrote under a name the declaration no
+longer names, never removes what was found, and reports what runs on the machine that it neither
+wrote nor holds. *How it is checked:* ADR 0163's table.
+
+**What the host joins, keeps and raises for a take** — revision, 2026-10-02
+([ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md), rules 4, 6 and 7). A
+container may name networks it also joins once it runs — the found network a per-machine setting keeps
+for a taken container while a neighbour still resolves it there; joined after the run, part of the
+container's spec, refused when it cannot be joined. A declaration may name the modules the mesh left
+out of it because a stored setting cannot compose with the module's definition: the host keeps what it
+wrote and holds for a left-out module and says so, where absence used to read as removal. And genesis
+raises the bootstrap forge under the forge module's container name, with the module's image digest and
+its data directory, so the module holds it by the found rule; the network is the one difference a take
+has left to say. *How it is checked:* a host test joins a kept network and refuses one it cannot; a
+host test keeps a left-out module's record and hold and removes an absent module's; a bootstrap test
+holds the installer's constants to the module's manifest where the catalogue is checked out beside it.
+
 **Found reaches every kind that can touch what the machine has**
 ([ADR 0103](../../02-DECISIONS/0103-what-an-adopted-node-holds-and-what-its-guard-refuses.md)). For a module not yet taken, a directory present with no record
 keeps its mode and owner, a unit present with no record keeps its state and boot setting, a
@@ -423,3 +447,45 @@ ignored an instruction and "applied" would be a lie. Applying stays one at a tim
 is not. **Checked** by the link's unit tests on the drain, and by the genesis bed's settle wait,
 which counts on a node catching up to the newest declaration rather than the oldest.
 
+## The host delivers its own successor
+
+*2026-09-29, from a change to the host that could reach no machine —
+[issue 142](../../04-ISSUES/142-the-host-is-the-one-thing-the-mesh-does-not-deliver/00-report.md),
+settled by [ADR 0141](../../02-DECISIONS/0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md).*
+
+A merge builds every changed module and the control plane, and the result reaches the machines running
+it with nobody asking. The host was the exception: not a build target, named by no declaration, and
+identical on every machine because somebody had copied it there.
+
+The supervision needed for this was already right. A clean exit from the host means it has stood aside,
+and the launcher's next turn runs whatever is on disk. Consecutive failed starts are counted, a
+rollback happens at the limit, and a second failure halts with the machine named rather than the binary.
+What was missing was smaller than it looked: nothing told the running host a successor was waiting, and
+the rollback resolved its known-good *version* through one operating system's package manager, which no
+machine here used.
+
+Keeping a version rather than a path was the clue. That is only useful to something that can choose
+between versions present on the machine — so the versions live side by side:
+
+- **A version arrives as an archive, in a directory named for it.** The ordinary resource, fetched by
+  digest and checked before anything is unpacked. The path written is never the path being executed, so
+  replacing a running binary — which the kernel refuses — never comes up.
+- **The launcher starts the most recently delivered version**, reading no pointer and following no
+  link, because the version is in the path.
+- **The running host stands aside between reconciles and never inside one.** Standing aside mid-apply is
+  the half-configured machine this document exists to prevent.
+- **A version that completes a reconcile records itself and retires what is older than its
+  predecessor.** The predecessor stays, because that is what a rollback needs.
+- **Rollback starts that predecessor** instead of reinstalling a package: no package manager, no cache
+  somebody else may clean, and the same script on every operating system.
+- **A machine says which host version it runs**, on the report it already sends, so being behind is
+  answerable at all.
+
+One copy by hand remains, once: the first host that understands versioned directories cannot be fetched
+by a host that does not.
+
+*How it is checked* is stated with the decision — a second version delivered to a running machine is
+run and reported; the exit follows an in-flight apply rather than interrupting it; a version that will
+not start is rolled back once and the second failure halts; a completed reconcile retires what is older
+than the predecessor and never the predecessor; and the newest of two delivered versions is the one
+that runs.

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/07-the-foundation.md

@@ -11,8 +11,9 @@ code:
   - mesh-catalog modules/postgres
   - mesh-catalog modules/lavinmq
   - mesh-lab test/integration/mesh.test.ts (a bare machine becomes a mesh)
-updated: 2026-09-22
+updated: 2026-09-29
 decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0142-the-mesh-delivers-its-own-components-as-binaries.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0088-the-foundation-filters-before-anything-listens.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0004-a-node-and-how-it-joins.md
@@ -314,4 +315,24 @@ of a database and pushed to over the broker. What arrived and what did not is th
 
 **One fault, and it was in the joining.** The token did not say what the mesh calls the machine,
 so enrolment needed a flag its own help said it did not — and failed at the broker with an empty
-username. Recorded in ADR 0004 as the fifth thing a token carries.
+username. Recorded in ADR 0004 as the fifth thing a token carries.
+
+## The mesh's own components arrive as binaries
+
+*2026-09-29 —
+[ADR 0142](../../02-DECISIONS/0142-the-mesh-delivers-its-own-components-as-binaries.md).*
+
+The bundle carries three images and one of them is the controller, *because there is nothing to fetch
+it with yet*. That reasoning holds and its conclusion changes: the controller is carried as a **binary**
+reference rather than an image reference, pinned by digest exactly as before. Nothing about the bundle's
+shape moves — it names a thing and the host fetches it — and the container runtime stops being something
+genesis must raise before the control plane can exist. It still raises one, for the store and the broker,
+which is where somebody else's software belongs.
+
+The mesh's own components — the host, the controller, the catalogue, the builder, the vault — are
+delivered as binaries into directories named for their versions, by the mechanism
+[ADR 0141](../../02-DECISIONS/0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md) describes. Third-party
+software stays a container. The split is not about isolation; it is about who built the thing.
+
+Measured before deciding it: the mesh's own components publish no ports at all, so this opens nothing.
+Only the store, the registry and the broker publish, and they are staying as they are.

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

@@ -7,8 +7,13 @@ code:
   - mesh-controller internal/identity/authority.go
   - mesh-host internal/identity/serving.go
   - mesh-host internal/apply (the service that reflects a rule set)
-updated: 2026-09-27
+updated: 2026-09-30
 decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0148-the-meshs-names-are-resolved-not-copied-into-containers.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0151-a-routes-internal-name-is-composed-under-the-node-that-serves-it.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0147-a-module-anchors-the-meshs-authority.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0138-an-assignment-binds-an-endpoint-and-says-how-far-it-reaches.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0140-the-filter-constrains-what-arrives-from-outside.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0104-a-provision-may-be-answered-by-an-adapter-to-the-predecessor.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0106-the-bus-is-nats.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0105-the-mesh-adopts-the-predecessors-tunnel-in-place.md
@@ -286,6 +291,31 @@ hosts file by the runtime. That extends the file decision rather than overturnin
 mesh and not chosen by a module: a module that listed the machines would go stale the day one
 joins, and a module that did not would be one whose containers cannot reach anything by name.
 
+**Superseded for containers by [ADR 0148](../../02-DECISIONS/0148-the-meshs-names-are-resolved-not-copied-into-containers.md)
+(2026-09-30).** Everything above still describes the machine's own roster file, which is how it works
+and how it will keep working. It no longer describes containers.
+
+Copying the roster into each container made the roster part of each container's identity, so one name
+moving replaced every container in the mesh — a module assigned on one machine restarted the store, the
+registry, the edge and mail on another
+([issue 151](../../04-ISSUES/151-a-new-name-recreates-every-container-in-the-mesh/00-report.md)). And it
+did not stop the staleness it was meant to: a copy taken at creation is stale the moment the roster
+moves, twice found as a container holding an address that had not existed for days
+([issues 109](../../04-ISSUES/109-a-container-keeps-the-address-it-was-made-with/00-report.md)
+and [135](../../04-ISSUES/135-a-containers-mesh-names-are-not-compared/00-report.md)).
+
+**A container resolves the mesh's names through its machine's resolver, at the moment it asks, and
+nothing is copied.** The resolver is a machine-level process rather than a container, so nothing
+circular is being asked for. It was gated on a container being able to reach the resolver from any of
+the runtime's networks
+([issue 110](../../04-ISSUES/110-a-container-on-the-runtimes-own-network-cannot-reach-the-resolver/00-report.md)),
+and landed the day that did, 2026-09-30: the controller writes no mesh name into a container and the
+host's digest carries only what the module declared for itself.
+
+The paragraph below states the old boundary, and 0148 deliberately gives it up: a container somebody
+started by hand resolves the same names as everything else, because the resolver answers the machine,
+not a list of containers.
+
 **The boundary, which is deliberate and worth stating:** *declared* containers. A container
 somebody starts by hand is not the mesh's to configure, and reaching into every container on a
 machine — declared or not — is what a nameserver in `resolv.conf` would be for.
@@ -296,6 +326,14 @@ machine — declared or not — is what a nameserver in `resolv.conf` would be f
 service, the rest is the node — so what resolves is *anything under a node's name*, going to that
 node. What routes it once it arrives is a proxy's, and stays separate.
 
+*2026-09-30.* **So the node in a route's internal name is the one whose proxy answers it**
+([ADR 0151](../../02-DECISIONS/0151-a-routes-internal-name-is-composed-under-the-node-that-serves-it.md)).
+Composed from the node the module ran on, the name sent a client to a machine with nothing listening
+whenever the proxy ran elsewhere
+([issue 139](../../04-ISSUES/139-an-internal-route-name-resolves-to-the-consumers-node/00-report.md));
+composed from the serving node, the rule above holds without exception. The public name stays the
+module's node's, which is where the operator put it.
+
 **The mesh writes the data and runs no daemon.** One wildcard per machine, from the same set that
 writes the hosts file. A resolver is third-party software and runs *on* the mesh rather than being
 *of* it: the mesh has no business shipping one, choosing which one, or knowing its configuration
@@ -371,7 +409,9 @@ can reach from the outside but cannot resolve from the inside is a name it canno
 authority of its own.
 
 **So a granted route is published into internal resolution as well** — the routed name to the node
-that serves it, mesh-wide, by the same mechanism that writes the node names. It is *given by the
+that serves it, mesh-wide, by the same mechanism that writes the node names — and as itself: a routed
+name has no mesh form, and the suffixed alias the roster once added beside it resolved to a refusal
+([issue 157](../../04-ISSUES/157-a-routed-names-internal-alias-is-served-by-nothing/00-report.md)). It is *given by the
 mesh, not chosen by a module*, for the same reason the node names are: a module listing the routes
 would go stale the day one changes. The mesh propagates the names it was told to serve and still
 knows nothing about what they mean
@@ -625,6 +665,50 @@ the found firewall reloads and reachable from a container on the node, that a ma
 enrols through the openings before and after a reload and a reboot, and that after the flip the
 declared port is open and the undeclared one closed.
 
+### It filters what arrives from outside, and not what the machine's own guests send
+
+*2026-09-28, preparing the control-node's convergence —
+[issue 141](../../04-ISSUES/141-the-forward-chain-does-not-follow-the-modules/00-report.md), settled by
+[ADR 0140](../../02-DECISIONS/0140-the-filter-constrains-what-arrives-from-outside.md), which replaces
+[ADR 0137](../../02-DECISIONS/0137-a-machine-says-which-networks-it-routes.md) and
+[ADR 0139](../../02-DECISIONS/0139-a-network-is-forwarded-because-a-module-declared-it.md).*
+
+Traffic passing through a machine is filtered, because a container's published port is traffic passing
+through rather than traffic arriving at the machine itself. Having blocked it, the filter then had to
+let the machine's own containers reach outward again — and it did that by listing the address ranges
+they sit on. Two of those ranges were constants in this repository's code, and the rest were typed by an
+operator after the flip had already cut a workstation's containers off from everything.
+
+**The list was the mistake, not its contents.** A constant describes one machine. A typed range goes
+stale and cannot tell a network the mesh made from one a predecessor left behind — on the control-node,
+six ranges fall outside the constants and two of the six belong to services the mesh does not run. The
+attempt to generate the list from the modules put half the rule set on the machine and made the
+derivation advisory. Three records, one list.
+
+**And the mesh has no position on a container reaching outward.** §4 exists to say which port is open
+and to whom, which is about what arrives. A container of this machine's own opening a connection
+somewhere is not a port opened to anybody, and the addresses it might do that from are the machine's
+internal plumbing, which the mesh neither owns nor can know.
+
+So the filter constrains what arrives from **outside** the machine and says nothing about what did not.
+Traffic passing through is allowed unless it came in on one of the machine's outward links, and then
+only where a declared endpoint's reach admits it (§6). The machine says which of its links face
+outside — one fact it reports, like the kind of firewall it found and the tunnel it carries, not a
+setting and not a list of addresses. It does not change when a module is added or removed, which is the
+whole difference from what it replaces. A machine that has reported no outward link is sent no filter
+at all, and keeps the one it has, because a rule written around a link with no name is a rule set that
+does not load — a machine filtering nothing while its unit reports success.
+
+Ports go on following the modules exactly as before: assign a module to a machine and the port its
+assignment says it reaches on opens. Nothing about a network is said anywhere, by anybody.
+
+*How it is checked:* a bed converges a machine carrying containers on several networks, none of them
+named in any setting, and each reaches outward afterwards — which fails against the previous behaviour,
+where the same flip cut them off, and is how it was written; a network made *after* the last declaration
+needs no new filter; a declared port is reachable from off the private network and an undeclared one is
+not; no address of a machine's own networks appears in a rendered filter, asserted on the text; and a
+machine reporting no outward link is refused in the control plane with its existing filter left alone.
+
 ## 5 — Certificates
 
 **Two authorities, kept separate on purpose.**
@@ -664,6 +748,22 @@ step, so when the authority moves the root is fetched again and the proxy is rec
 *How it is checked:* the route-forwarding bed installs the authority, the proxy and a consumer
 from the catalogue and asserts the routed name is served.
 
+**And a machine trusts that authority because a module put its root in its trust store**
+([ADR 0147](../../02-DECISIONS/0147-a-module-anchors-the-meshs-authority.md)). The proxy's fetch
+answers for the proxy and for nothing else: a browser, `git` over HTTPS, a package manager and
+every module calling another by an internal name read the machine's own trust store, and the mesh
+had never written anything there. A module requiring the authority does the whole of it — fetch
+the root over the mesh network, place it where this machine's TLS clients look, refresh the
+extracted bundles — and stopping it, which is what being unassigned does, takes the anchor away
+and refreshes them again. Not the controller's business, because being on the private network is
+what makes the authority *reachable* and is not the same fact as having a reason to *verify* a
+mesh name; and because where anchors live and which command refreshes them is one operating
+system's difference, which is the host's half of the mesh
+([ADR 0005](../../02-DECISIONS/0005-the-node-host.md)).
+*How it is checked:* on a machine holding the module a plain client verifies an internal HTTPS
+name with no bundle argument, and on one without it the same fetch fails to find an issuer — both
+halves, because only the pair tells the anchor apart from something that already trusted it.
+
 ### What was built
 
 *2026-08-31.*
@@ -710,6 +810,60 @@ that verifies against the internal root and nothing else — which cannot succee
 first reached the name to certify it*
 ([ADR 0066](../../02-DECISIONS/0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md)).
 
+## 6 — One statement behind exposure, filtering and certificates
+
+*2026-09-28, preparing the control-node's convergence —
+[issue 140](../../04-ISSUES/140-an-endpoints-reach-is-not-declared/00-report.md), settled by
+[ADR 0138](../../02-DECISIONS/0138-an-assignment-binds-an-endpoint-and-says-how-far-it-reaches.md).*
+
+The three sections above each decide, independently, how far a service reaches. §3 composes a name
+from a label and the node's domain. §4 opens a port to the source a listen named. §5 certifies the
+names that exist, from whichever authority the proxy holds. Each is coherent on its own, and together
+they mean **reachability is never stated anywhere** — it is the sum of three derivations, and a sum is
+not something anyone can review or refuse.
+
+What that costs, measured: an identity provider holding a public certificate valid 90 days and an
+internal one valid 24 hours, neither asked for by any assignment, because both names existed and a
+proxy certifies what it serves. And an endpoint that is not routed — git over ssh — which can be
+spoken about only in the filter's vocabulary, so *this must be reachable from outside* is a setting
+exactly one mechanism reads.
+
+**An endpoint is the thing that was missing.** A module declares named endpoints: one port it serves,
+what it is for, and what it would serve that to absent any instruction. A route contribution names an
+endpoint rather than repeating a port number. An assignment — which is where a module's configuration
+lives ([ADR 0046](../../02-DECISIONS/0046-a-module-configuration-is-its-assignments-not-its-manifest.md))
+— then binds each endpoint to a machine port and says how far it reaches.
+
+One value, three readers:
+
+| reach | the filter opens | the proxy serves | the certificate comes from |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `internal` | the machine port, to the private network | the internal name | the mesh's own authority |
+| `public` | the machine port, to anywhere | the public name | the public authority |
+| `both` | the machine port, to anywhere | both names | each name's own authority |
+
+**An endpoint that is not routed is reached and never named.** No route contribution means no name is
+composed and no certificate requested, while the filter still acts on it. That is the case the model
+could not express at all, and it is the ordinary case for anything that is not HTTP.
+
+**Nothing moves until an assignment says so.** An endpoint whose assignment is silent keeps the
+default its manifest states, so every machine already converged renders exactly as it does today —
+the same property §4 needed when a machine gained a way to say which networks it routes.
+
+This is what the certificate questions were waiting for. Which authority signs a name, whether a name
+may appear in a public issuance log, and what must be trusted where are all answerable once an
+endpoint says whether it is internal — and unanswerable while the proxy decides by composing every
+name it can. It is also the fact
+[issue 139](../../04-ISSUES/139-an-internal-route-name-resolves-to-the-consumers-node/00-report.md)
+needs: an internal name should be composed from the machine serving the endpoint, which is the
+assignment that bound it.
+
+**How it is checked** is stated with the decision: one module with two endpoints of differing reach
+asserted per chain body; the names and the certificate requests following the reach and failing
+against today's behaviour, where both are always composed; an unrouted endpoint filtered and never
+named; an assignment naming an endpoint the module does not declare refused where it is said; and a
+silent assignment rendering byte-identically to today.
+
 ## What this removes
 
 The list is worth having in one place, because it is most of the argument:

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/09-the-node-lifecycle.md

@@ -8,8 +8,9 @@ code:
   - mesh-host packaging/nox-mesh-host-network.sh
   - mesh-controller internal/token
   - mesh-controller internal/inventory/nodes.go
-updated: 2026-09-23
+updated: 2026-10-02
 decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0004-a-node-and-how-it-joins.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0005-the-node-host.md
@@ -311,6 +312,32 @@ found firewall again and converges the openings through it; what was taken stays
 a predecessor leaves one and asserts nothing that serves changes until a module is taken or the
 node is converged, and that the flip closes exactly what the preview said.
 
+**Taking a module is previewed, and the preview is a comparison** — revision, 2026-10-01
+([ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md)). For every held thing a
+module would replace, `take` puts what runs beside what the module declares: a container's image and
+its age, name, networks and their other members, published ports and their reach, mounts; a file's
+kept original against the declared content, as a difference; a secret the mesh minted for a service
+that already has one; the module's settings composed against its definition. An older image, a
+differing file and a minted secret for found data refuse unless named; a narrowed port and a shared
+network are said. `take --yes <digest>` cuts over what was previewed, as the flip does. A taken
+container may keep a found network by a per-machine setting while its neighbours are not yet taken.
+*How it is checked:* ADR 0163's table.
+
+**A setting is judged where it is stored, and the take's words** — revision, 2026-10-02
+([ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md), rules 1, 2, 4 and 6).
+The preview ends with a digest of what it said; `take --yes <digest>` acts on that preview and nothing
+else, and a preview that has changed since, or an account of the machine older than the flip allows, is
+refused as the flip's is. A module the machine holds nothing for has nothing to compare, and `--yes`
+suffices. The overrides are `--downgrade`, `--replace <path>` and `--mint <name>`; the per-machine
+setting that keeps a found network is `networks`, a container id to the networks it keeps, accepted
+for an adopted machine only. Storing a setting composes it against the module's current definition and
+refuses, naming node, module, layer and key, what cannot compose or reaches nothing. A definition that
+later moves under a stored setting costs that module its place in the machine's declaration, said by
+name in `plan`, `push` and the declaration itself, and the machine is told everything else; a stray
+setting no longer refuses the machine where it is read. *How it is checked:* controller tests over the
+one judgement — refused where stored, a module left out where composed, the envelope naming it — and
+over a take's digest, staleness and secrets.
+
 A candidate machine is not empty. It has a package manager, probably a container runtime,
 configuration somebody chose. [ADR 0005](../../02-DECISIONS/0005-the-node-host.md)
 says the host never touches what it did not create — adoption is the deliberate act of taking

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/10-delivery.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ code:
   - mesh-controller internal/builder
   - mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller (build, build --behind, push, status)
   - mesh-controller internal/inventory/builds.go
-updated: 2026-09-21
+updated: 2026-09-29
 decisions:
   - 02-DECISIONS/0090-a-failure-that-repeats-is-said-to-be-stuck.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0082-the-registry-is-reached-by-name-and-trusted-by-the-overlay.md
@@ -226,3 +226,34 @@ when the current failure began and how many reports in a row have said it — th
 id, whatever the words; three make the machine stuck, and `status` says so beside the failure. The host keeps trying — stuck is what the mesh
 knows, not what the machine is told. *How it is checked:* an inventory test counts three identical
 reports, a different one, and a clean apply; the status test asserts the word appears.
+
+## Everything may call what is exposed to it, and local is not a boundary
+
+*2026-09-29, from an outage that ran eleven hours —
+[issue 145](../../04-ISSUES/145-a-machine-reads-healthy-while-its-modules-cannot-reach-each-other/00-report.md),
+settled by [ADR 0144](../../02-DECISIONS/0144-anything-on-a-machine-may-call-anything-on-it.md).*
+
+A grant is four facts and a credential: the provision, the machine, the port, and who the consumer is
+when it connects. It is the whole mechanism by which anything in the mesh reaches anything else, and it
+rests on three things being callable — what runs on the same machine, another machine's service over the
+private network where it is exposed there, and another machine's service over the public network where it
+is exposed there.
+
+The filter had two of those. A service exposed to the private network admitted the machines' own addresses
+on it; a caller on the machine carries such an address, and a caller inside one of that machine's
+containers carries a bridge address and matched nothing. Measured, same destination and same machine:
+`src 10.10.0.1` from the machine, `src 172.17.0.8` from a container on it. So a module reaching its
+database on its own machine's name timed out for eleven hours while the mesh called the machine healthy.
+
+The second case worked by accident: a caller on another machine arrives over the tunnel carrying that
+machine's address, which the rule matched. Two of three working is why this read as correct.
+
+**So local is not a boundary this mesh draws, and the filter says so once.** Traffic that did not arrive
+from outside the machine and did not arrive over the private network is the machine's own, and is
+admitted — for every service there, not per service. Whether the caller is a container, a unit or a shell
+decides nothing, because the question is "is this the same machine".
+
+A verification mechanism was drafted for this and withdrawn. It would have reported the outage sooner and
+would not have prevented it, and the part of it that was hard — deciding which network position to check
+from — existed only because the rule was wrong. Whether the mesh should check that a grant works is still
+open, in issue 145; it is not the remedy for a configuration error.

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/12-a-module-repository.md

@@ -7,9 +7,10 @@ code:
   - mesh-controller internal/catalogue/build.go
   - mesh-controller internal/inventory/secrets.go
   - mesh-controller cmd/mesh-builder
-updated: 2026-09-12
+updated: 2026-09-30
 decisions:
   - 02-DECISIONS/0069-a-module-is-a-repository-and-a-path.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0037-where-a-module-lives.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0009-modules-and-the-graph.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0010-delivery.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0005-the-node-host.md
@@ -60,6 +61,32 @@ module from a repository and a path, and the root-only reading left every existi
 unbuildable — pointed at the catalogue the builder finds no manifest, pointed at a module's source
 it finds no manifest either.*
 
+## A manifest is checked where it is written
+
+*Added 2026-09-30, from [issue 148](../../04-ISSUES/148-a-manifest-outside-this-catalogue-has-no-check/00-report.md).*
+
+The check the mesh applies at registration — the manifest parses strictly, every name in it is a
+usable one, its routes and events and seats are well formed, and no two manifests given together
+declare one seat — is a verb on the controller's binary, `module check <manifest>…`, and it needs no
+mesh. It reads the files it is given, runs the same functions registration runs, prints every problem
+in the manifest's own words, and exits non-zero if there was one. Somebody describing their own
+application in their own repository — the case [ADR 0037](../../02-DECISIONS/0037-where-a-module-lives.md)
+calls the one that matters most — runs it before pushing, and finds out there rather than when a
+running mesh refuses the registration, or later, when a machine applies something that resolved and
+should not have.
+
+**What it cannot know, it says.** A seat another module declares elsewhere is unknown to a check that
+was not handed that module's manifest, and the output says so rather than refusing: pass the other
+manifest too. The mesh's own seats it knows from the binary, which is the one place that set may be
+read without a store ([ADR 0122](../../02-DECISIONS/0122-a-seat-is-data-a-rename-is-a-database-update.md)
+keeps the store authoritative, so a claim on a mesh seat is judged fully only at registration, and the
+check says that too).
+
+*How it is checked:* the controller's test runs the check over the catalogue checkout beside it and
+over a manifest with a known fault, and asserts the first passes and the second names the fault; the
+test that used to be the only check, `TestEveryCatalogueManifestParses`, now stands beside a command
+anybody can run.
+
 ## The manifest in the repository is not the manifest the mesh holds
 
 A resource names an artifact:

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/13-credentials-and-their-rotation.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ code:
   - mesh-controller internal/inventory/secrets.go
   - mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/rotate.go
   - mesh-controller examples/postgres-provisioner
-updated: 2026-09-21
+updated: 2026-10-01
 decisions:
   - 02-DECISIONS/0001-mesh-brokers-nodes-host-agents-think.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0009-modules-and-the-graph.md
@@ -136,3 +136,16 @@ rotates, and is queried for who holds it, through exactly the machinery describe
 The rotation a module's own secret lacks is not a second mechanism; it is this one, pointed at a
 secret the vault provides. What this page proves for a database password holds, by construction,
 for a secret from the vault.
+
+*Built 2026-10-01, the read-at-start half ([issue 180](../../04-ISSUES/180-a-modules-own-secret-cannot-be-rotated/00-report.md),
+[ADR 0114](../../02-DECISIONS/0114-a-shared-credential-rotates-over-two-credentials.md)).* An own secret
+says how the module takes it — `taken: at-start` or `taken: applied` on its entry — and the mesh
+rotates only the first: `secret rotate <node> <module> <name>` makes it anew, seals it to the machine
+and the operator, and sends the machine, so the module starts again on it. A secret that says neither
+is refused with the word to write, because a credential rotated under software that never reads it
+again is the fault of issue 179 made deliberately; an applied one is refused until the staged form is
+built; an accepted one is refused as ADR 0113 says. `rotate` is a verb on the controller's seat with
+both shapes, so the console asks for either. A provider that shares its one credential with every
+consumer ([ADR 0158](../../02-DECISIONS/0158-a-provider-with-one-credential-shares-it-with-every-consumer.md))
+rotates the same way, with every holder's copy remade and every holding machine sent together. *How it is checked:* the tests named in issue 180, and a
+live rotation through the console of a secret a module reads at start.

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/15-the-agent-session.md

@@ -148,6 +148,10 @@ than reproduced from a declaration — because there is nothing to reproduce it
 ([ADR 0025](../../02-DECISIONS/0025-the-design-record-is-read-not-copied.md)), not by holding a
 copy. It is that reader; there is not a second agent for it.
 
+*2026-09-30:* the reading is a module's — `records`, [35 — Reading the record](35-reading-the-record.md),
+[ADR 0153](../../02-DECISIONS/0153-the-record-is-read-by-a-module-and-the-console-lists-it.md). The
+session, when built, asks it rather than reading for itself; what it adds is judgement, not text.
+
 **It answers into a symptom search**, so what it knows appears beside ordinary results rather than
 only when it is asked. **And when it cannot be reached, the search says so.** A result set that
 silently omits this material looks identical to one where nothing matched — the same rule as the

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/18-building-a-module.md

@@ -5,8 +5,11 @@ code:
   - mesh-controller cmd/mesh-builder
   - mesh-controller internal/builder
   - mesh-catalog modules/builder
-updated: 2026-09-25
+updated: 2026-10-01
 decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0157-a-build-says-what-it-does-on-the-bus-as-it-happens.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0150-a-modules-own-code-runs-as-supervised-processes-under-one-account.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0142-the-mesh-delivers-its-own-components-as-binaries.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0111-a-build-source-is-on-the-git-seat-or-external.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0097-a-vendor-image-is-a-declared-build-input.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0096-an-upstream-image-is-copied-between-registries.md
@@ -184,7 +187,8 @@ disagrees with it.
 | `grants` | credentials it must create for its consumers |
 | `filtering` | rules beyond its own ports |
 | `computed` | marks a module the controller generates rather than an author writing |
-| `build.artifacts` | what it produces |
+| `build.artifacts` | what it produces; an artifact's `context` may be a URL or a path on the git seat (`seat: git`), composed by the mesh that builds it |
+| `names-on-purpose` | on a resource: each name it means to name — the world's federation server, a registry that built an application the mesh does not — with its reason. A definition names no installation, and a test says so ([ADR 0155](../../02-DECISIONS/0155-a-definition-names-no-installation-and-how-that-is-checked.md)) |
 
 **A container mounts only what the manifest declares**
 ([ADR 0091](../../02-DECISIONS/0091-a-mount-is-declared-three-ways.md)). A bind mount the module
@@ -231,10 +235,10 @@ counts as a copy and what as a base.
 
 | resource | is | a module may |
 |---|---|---|
-| `directory` | a directory with a mode and an owner | ✅ |
-| `file` | literal content, with `${bound:…}` and `${secret:…}` filled in | ✅ |
+| `directory` | a directory with a mode and an owner, **placed by the mesh** under the node's root: `place: "."` is the assignment's own root, `place: "mesh"` the mesh's directory for the module, a pathless one sits beneath the root by its id; a stated path is the placement for data that must stay where it is, and may itself sit beneath a placed one (`${dir:<id>}/…`). Everything else names it as `${dir:<id>}` ([issue 119](../../04-ISSUES/119-a-module-definition-decides-where-its-files-live/00-report.md), [174](../../04-ISSUES/174-the-meshs-own-files-for-a-module-are-placed-by-the-definition/00-report.md)) | ✅ |
+| `file` | literal content, with `${bound:…}`, `${secret:…}`, `${dir:…}`, `${port:…}`, `${machine:…}` and `${setting:…}` filled in — the last an operator's value from the assignment's settings, refused by name when unset ([ADR 0155](../../02-DECISIONS/0155-a-definition-names-no-installation-and-how-that-is-checked.md)) | ✅ |
 | `user` | a login | ✅ |
-| `access` | a pre-existing path it may use and must not own | ✅ |
+| `access` | a pre-existing path it may use and must not own, **named by id** and placed by the assignment (`accesses: {<id>: <path>}` on its settings); mounts say `${access:<id>}`; a path in the definition is the default an assignment replaces, tolerated while the catalogue converts ([issue 153](../../04-ISSUES/153-an-adopted-machines-data-cannot-be-placed-where-it-is/00-report.md)) | ✅ |
 | `archive` | files fetched by digest and unpacked | ✅ |
 | `package` | a package that must be present | ✅ |
 | `network` | a named container network | ✅ |
@@ -263,3 +267,52 @@ ships one and wrong for code the mesh built, which has no unit until the mesh wr
 
 **Tools, hooks and consumers are not further modes**, which is the test of whether three is the
 right number: they are loaded by a tool host, and a tool host is a process that stays up.
+
+## A build says what it does, as it happens
+
+*2026-10-01 — [ADR 0157](../../02-DECISIONS/0157-a-build-says-what-it-does-on-the-bus-as-it-happens.md).*
+
+A build machine narrates every build on the bus as the role it holds: `started` when it takes the
+work, one `log.<build id>` event per line — every command it runs with its duration, every step of
+the recipe, and on failure the command's own output, line by line — and `built` for the outcome as
+before. The same lines still go to the machine's standard error, so a build machine with nobody
+listening is as readable as it was; a listener reads the same lines, live, from anywhere on the mesh.
+
+One build is one subject. A reader follows it by subscribing that subject and nothing else, and the
+events stream keeps it for a week, so `builds --log <id>` — on the command line and as the
+controller's seat verb through the console — reads it back afterwards. `builds` lists every build's
+id beside it, and `build` says the id it asked with. The mesh keeps no second copy: the stream is the
+log. The console's `build` tool asks and answers at once with the id; the outcome is taken in — the
+build recorded, the module registered with its source — by whoever hears it, the waiting command or
+the daemon following the role's event, so a build nobody waited for still reaches the catalogue
+([issue 176](../../04-ISSUES/176-the-consoles-build-tool-neither-waits-nor-registers/00-report.md)). A viewer of builds, when one is built, is a subscriber over these subjects and the outcome; the
+builder needs nothing more for it.
+
+*How it is checked:* the holder's grant is exactly `started`, `built` and `log.*` (broker test); a
+build's lines reach a reader of its subject in order and the stream holds them afterwards (link test
+against a real server); the seat verb with an id reads the log (controller test); and, live, a build
+after the roll-out read line by line through the console.
+
+## The builder compiles the languages the mesh is written in
+
+*2026-09-29 —
+[ADR 0142](../../02-DECISIONS/0142-the-mesh-delivers-its-own-components-as-binaries.md).*
+
+The toolchain list was typescript and python, and only typescript had a base module in the catalogue.
+Meanwhile the control plane — written in the language this project is mostly written in — was built as
+an image from a hand-written Dockerfile, which is the per-repository incantation this whole mechanism
+exists to abolish.
+
+So the list gains Go, with a base module providing the compiler exactly as typescript has one. The
+obligation the list's own comment warns about — an SDK carrying the broker client, the event envelope
+and tool serving — attaches to a **module** written in a language, not to the language being
+compilable. The mesh's own components are not modules in that sense; the host is what applies modules.
+
+**And an artifact says what it targets.** A compiled binary is per operating system, pinned at link
+time, and a toolchain deliberately accepts nothing from the module — anything a module could override
+there it would be writing a Dockerfile to override. The target is therefore a property of the artifact,
+not of the recipe: one artifact declared per target, one build each.
+
+A component's version stops being stamped in at link time. It is unpacked into a directory named for
+its version, so it reads its version from its own path, and a build no longer has to know what it will
+be called.

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/20-writing-a-module.md

@@ -5,8 +5,9 @@ code:
   - mesh-catalog modules/showcase
   - mesh-controller internal/builder
   - mesh-sdk src
-updated: 2026-09-21
+updated: 2026-09-30
 decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0150-a-modules-own-code-runs-as-supervised-processes-under-one-account.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0099-a-step-that-runs-once-names-what-it-reads.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0053-a-step-that-runs-on-a-schedule.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0074-the-wire-is-specified-not-the-types.md

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/24-the-secrets-vault.md

@@ -2,8 +2,9 @@
 layer: to-be
 status: implemented
 code: [mesh-catalog, mesh-controller, mesh-host]
-updated: 2026-09-21
+updated: 2026-10-01
 decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0158-a-provider-with-one-credential-shares-it-with-every-consumer.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0094-a-module-may-hold-several-secrets-from-one-provider.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0092-an-operator-delivers-a-pair-credential.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0085-a-secret-is-a-provision.md
@@ -127,6 +128,22 @@ credential a provider grants; the export names each entry by the node and module
 the name they know it by, and says whether it is a module's own secret or a pair credential, so
 recovery addresses both alike.
 
+### A provider with one credential
+
+*Decided 2026-10-01 ([ADR 0158](../../02-DECISIONS/0158-a-provider-with-one-credential-shares-it-with-every-consumer.md)); the controller's half built the same day (mesh-controller PR 184): the offer's word, the need carrying the shared secret's name, the vault's one value under one generation stamp, remade for every holder on a later binding or a rotation, the rotate command sending every holder. What remains is each provider's definition saying `credential` and `taken`, with a start that applies the file — the media catalogue's work.*
+
+Software that holds one credential — a download client's web password, an indexer's one API key —
+cannot give each consumer a login, so ADR 0048's form does not fit it and its values were accepted
+by hand. An offer may now say `"credential": {"own": "<secret>"}`: the provider's own secret *is* the
+credential every consumer of that provision receives, in the shape of an ordinary pair credential,
+under the provider's one user name. The vault keeps one value per provider assignment and provision,
+sealed to the provider's machine, each consumer's machine and the operator; because it holds no
+plaintext it remakes the value for every holder at once when a consumer binds or unbinds or a
+rotation is asked, and the mesh sends every holding machine together. The provider takes it as it
+says it takes its own secret (`taken`, issue 180); consumers read it at start. An accepted value is
+sealed to the consumers of the moment and not remade; a consumer that binds later waits for the next
+acceptance. *How it is checked:* the rows of ADR 0158's table; the controller's rows pass, the live row waits for the first provider.
+
 ## Beyond generate and hold
 
 Owning a secret means owning more than its creation. The mesh being migrated onto has a working

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/25-the-bus-on-nats.md

@@ -7,10 +7,12 @@ code:
   - mesh-tools src/broker-amqp.ts (to be replaced)
   - mesh-catalog modules/nats (to be written)
   - mesh-sdk src (the protocol's NATS binding, step 3)
-updated: 2026-09-27
+updated: 2026-10-01
 decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0160-the-mesh-issues-an-assignments-subjects-and-a-runtime-serves-what-it-is-issued.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0157-a-build-says-what-it-does-on-the-bus-as-it-happens.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0106-the-bus-is-nats.md
-  - 02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0116-the-bus-is-built-in-five-steps.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0074-the-wire-is-specified-not-the-types.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0079-the-foundation-seats-are-named-after-their-servers.md
@@ -80,8 +82,18 @@ mesh.seat.<seat>.accept.<verb>    work submitted to a role     (JetStream: per-s
 mesh.seat.<seat>.event.<verb>     a role's own event           (JetStream: EVENTS)
 mesh.seat.<seat>.tool.<verb>      a role's tool                (core request/reply)
 mesh.ask.<node>.<command>         the controller's command api (core request/reply)
+mesh.assignment.<node>.<module>   an assignment's membership   (JetStream: ASSIGNMENTS, last-per-subject)
 ```
 
+**Revised 2026-10-01** ([ADR 0160](../../02-DECISIONS/0160-the-mesh-issues-an-assignments-subjects-and-a-runtime-serves-what-it-is-issued.md)): the rows above
+for a module's and a seat's tools are the shapes the controller *issues*, not rules a runtime carries.
+Every assignment is published a membership — what it serves and where, in which queue, its seat verbs,
+where its events land, what it may reach — on `mesh.assignment.<node>.<module>`, kept last per subject
+like a declaration, republished when the assignment's facts change. The runtime serves exactly that
+list; the account's grant is the same membership read the other way; the console's listing carries each
+tool's subject. The one rule a runtime keeps is the membership's own subject, from the two names in its
+credential.
+
 **Revised 2026-09-27** ([ADR 0129](../../02-DECISIONS/0129-a-seat-carries-the-protocol-of-its-role.md)):
 **`mesh.build.request`, `mesh.control.built` and the BUILDS stream are gone.** A build is work submitted to a role, and the
 mesh already has a shape for that — a seat's `accept` subjects, on a work queue with a queue group of
@@ -135,7 +147,7 @@ Core NATS is at-most-once. Everything the mesh must not lose lives in a JetStrea
 |---|---|---|---|
 | CONTROL | `mesh.control.>` except `alive` (a build's outcome moved to its seat, ADR 0121) | work queue, one consumer (the controller), explicit ack | the store-window guarantee ([ADR 0083](../../02-DECISIONS/0083-one-push-leaves-the-mesh-consistent.md)): the controller `nak`s with a delay while its store is away and the message is redelivered; nothing is dropped |
 | NODES | `mesh.node.>` | last per subject | one declaration per node, always the newest |
-| EVENTS | `mesh.mod.*.event.>` | limits (age, size), durable consumer per subscribing module | a subscriber that was down catches up; after `max-deliver` attempts the advisory feeds `mesh.events.dead` (its own small stream) |
+| EVENTS | `mesh.mod.*.event.>` and `mesh.seat.*.event.>` | limits (age, size), durable consumer per subscribing module | a subscriber that was down catches up; after `max-deliver` attempts the advisory feeds `mesh.events.dead` (its own small stream). *2026-10-01:* a build's whole log is here too, as the build-machine seat's `log.<build id>` events ([ADR 0157](../../02-DECISIONS/0157-a-build-says-what-it-does-on-the-bus-as-it-happens.md)) — one subject per build, a week of retention, read back by `builds --log <id>` with a consumer that is gone when the reading is done |
 
 Tool calls and heartbeats stay on core NATS: a lost heartbeat is the next heartbeat; a lost tool
 call is a timeout the caller already handles.
@@ -303,7 +315,7 @@ the private network. It is raised at genesis like the store, adopted as a module
 phase.
 
 **The deprecated broker is an ordinary module, not a compatibility layer.** Revision, second review
-([ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md)): earlier text here, and
+([ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseded by [ADR 0131](../../02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md): AMQP is not a provision, and everything speaks to the `mesh-broker` seat)): earlier text here, and
 ADR 0106 before it, called it `lavinmq-compat` — one purpose, the predecessor's clients, and a
 retirement condition of no client connected for a period the operator sets. It is none of those.
 A module may legitimately need an AMQP broker as a **backing service**, the way it needs a
@@ -361,6 +373,13 @@ bridged. It is three things:
 
 Nothing is built of this before §10's bed passes; the MCP surface is a thin adapter over (2).
 
+*Built, and then made a module — 2026-09-30.* (1) and (2) exist: `operator issue` and the `mesh`
+client. What (2) describes as a program on the workstation is now the recovery path; the surface an
+operator uses is a module the mesh assigns to the machine, holding a credential the mesh minted —
+[ADR 0152](../../02-DECISIONS/0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md),
+[34 — The console](34-the-console.md). The tool list it asks for is no longer
+`catalog_tools`, which nothing served: each runtime answers `tools` for its own module.
+
 ## 8. What a module sees, and what the wire does
 
 **The contract a module is written against does not change.** `publish` on an envelope becomes a
@@ -534,7 +553,7 @@ find what changed and why.
 **Still open:**
 
 - ~~Whether EVENTS should be one stream or one per emitting module.~~ **Closed**
-  ([ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseding [ADR 0125](../../02-DECISIONS/0125-the-bus-is-the-only-broker.md))): one stream, and not as a
+  ([ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseded by [ADR 0131](../../02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md): AMQP is not a provision, and everything speaks to the `mesh-broker` seat) (superseding [ADR 0125](../../02-DECISIONS/0125-the-bus-is-the-only-broker.md))): one stream, and not as a
   preference — the streams the bus is made of are composed as configuration before any module
   runs, because a provisioner is itself a module that needs a bus account to start. Bootstrapping
   decides it.

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/26-the-seats.md

@@ -4,12 +4,16 @@ status: implemented
 code:
   - mesh-controller internal/catalogue/seats.go
   - mesh-controller internal/catalogue/resolve.go
+  - mesh-controller internal/inventory/seats.go
+  - mesh-controller internal/inventory/migrations/0039-a-seat-is-held-by-one-assignment-on-record.sql
   - mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/seats.go
   - mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/source.go
   - mesh-controller internal/inventory/migrations/0032-a-source-may-live-on-a-seat.sql
   - mesh-catalog modules/gitea/module.json
-updated: 2026-09-27
+updated: 2026-10-01
 decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0161-what-deserves-a-seat.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0126-a-module-declares-its-own-seats.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0128-the-mesh-bus-is-required-not-ambient.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0111-a-build-source-is-on-the-git-seat-or-external.md
@@ -42,11 +46,47 @@ is refused. A seat makes a role singular, never a module.
 **The seat points at the assignment.** Everything the mesh knows about the holder is what it knows
 about that assignment: the node, the node's settings for the module, and what the module serves.
 
+**Which assignment holds a seat is a fact on record, and changes as one act.** Revision, 2026-09-27
+([ADR 0131](../../02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md)). Until
+then the holder was derived — the module that is assigned and claims the seat holds it, and a second
+eligible assignment was refused. That has no way to pass a seat from one holder to the next without a
+moment in which nobody holds it, and the controller finds its own bus through one of these seats: that
+moment took the control plane down for an evening. So the holder is now one row the controller keeps,
+written by a handover — `seat <name> --to <node>/<module>` — that names the seat and the assignment
+taking it over and replaces the previous holder in the same write. Between two handovers the seat has
+exactly one holder, and it is never none.
+
+Three consequences follow. **A seat with no row is held as it always was**: the sole eligible
+assignment holds it, and two eligible ones are refused — so a mesh that has never handed a seat over
+behaves exactly as before, and the row appears the first time somebody does. **With a row, any other
+assignment whose module could hold the seat is eligible and silent**: neither refused nor holding.
+That is what lets the next holder run beside the current one until the handover, which the bus's move
+needs ([28](28-building-the-bus.md), task 5.3). **And a holding is the assignment's**: unassigning the
+holder takes the row with it, so a seat never points at something that is not running anywhere, and
+the seat falls back to derivation rather than to nothing.
+
+The handover refuses what would make the new holder wrong before anything is written: the seat must
+exist, the assignment must exist, and the module must be able to hold the seat — claim it at its scope
+and provide what it delivers, judged against the store's row and not against anything compiled into a
+binary. It does not check that the module is running yet; `push` confirms that afterwards, and a
+handover that could only be recorded after the new holder was up could not be the switch.
+
 **The set is closed.** A seat the mesh does not define is refused wherever it is named, and so is one
 named at the wrong scope. Adding a seat is a decision, recorded, for the reason every addition to the
 host's vocabulary is one: the set is what a person reads to learn what a mesh can have, and an entry
 nobody argued for is an entry nobody can explain.
 
+**What deserves one** ([ADR 0161](../../02-DECISIONS/0161-what-deserves-a-seat.md)). A provision the
+mesh's own code dereferences by name is delivered by a mesh seat its provider claims — the store, the
+bus, the vault, the artifact store, the catalogue. A provision a module merely offers may have several
+providers, and a consumer with several is a person's choice. A fact of the shape *exactly one machine
+is X* — the hub — is not a seat, because a seat is held by a module assignment and points at it; it is
+a placement with a capacity of one, kept by the store, refused by name when a second is placed, and
+named in the listing. And a seat whose role is to speak to what the machine runs — the uplink — is
+held only by the dialect the machine runs: the machine says which in its profile, renewed with every
+report, and the holder declares the capability, so the wrong one is refused the way any missing
+capability is.
+
 ## The set
 
 **The set is derived, and only the mesh's half is written here.** Revision, 2026-09-26
@@ -80,8 +120,8 @@ convention, which later seats departed from.
 | `mesh-controller` | — | mesh | — | the controller |
 | `mesh-store` | — | mesh | — | the store the mesh's own records live in |
 | `mesh-broker` | — | mesh | `mesh-bus` | the broker carrying the mesh's own bus |
-| `mesh-vault` | — | mesh | `secret`, reserved | the vault |
-| `mesh-artifact-store` | `the-artifact-store` | mesh | `artifact-store` | the artifact registry |
+| `mesh-vault` | — | mesh | `secret` | the vault (in the seed since [ADR 0161](../../02-DECISIONS/0161-what-deserves-a-seat.md); the earlier *reserved* named an effect no rule produced) |
+| `mesh-artifact-store` | `the-artifact-store` (renamed 2026-09-30, [ADR 0156](../../02-DECISIONS/0156-an-artifact-is-what-a-build-produces-and-the-store-is-named-for-its-scope.md)) | mesh | `artifact-store` | the artifact registry |
 | `mesh-catalog` | `the-catalogue` | mesh | — | the catalogue |
 | `mesh-npm-package-registry` | `npm-package-registry` | mesh | `npm-package-registry` | the forge |
 | `mesh-git` | `git` | mesh | `git` | the forge |
@@ -207,9 +247,13 @@ checked as their tables say:
 | `mesh-*` is the mesh's, and a module may not declare one | 0118: a registration test refusing a manifest that declares any `mesh-*` seat, naming the prefix. |
 | Two modules cannot declare the same seat | 0118: a registration test; the second is refused and the first untouched. |
 | A holder satisfies the seat's protocol | 0118: a claim whose module does not serve what the seat declares is refused at assignment. |
-| A seat is held by one assignment, and only by one whose module can hold it | 0118: resolution tests for a second holder and for a seat the definition does not name. |
+| A seat is held by one assignment, and only by one whose module can hold it | 0118: resolution tests for a second holder and for a seat the definition does not name. 0131: `CanHold` is the one judgement, shared by registration and the handover, and its test follows the store's row. |
+| A holder on record settles the seat; another eligible assignment is silent, not refused | 0131: resolution tests with a recorded holder on the same machine, on another machine, and under a seat's former name; without a record, the old rule's tests still pass unchanged. |
+| A handover replaces the holder as one write, needs an assignment to point at, and goes with it | 0131: store tests — a second handover leaves one row; a handover to a module not assigned where named is refused; unassigning the holder removes the row. |
 | A requirement naming a seat is answered by its holder; a foundation seat cannot be named | 0118: resolution tests with a second provider on the consumer's node, with the seat unheld, and naming `mesh-store`. |
 | Several providers and none local is a person's choice | 0118: an assignment test listing candidates with the seat's holder first and recording the pin. |
-| `secret` is reserved | 0118: the parser and resolution refusals for another provider and a pin. |
+| `secret` has one provider, the holder of `mesh-vault` | 0161: a second claimant of the seat is refused by name (`CanHold`); *correction of fact, 2026-10-01: no parser rule ever reserved the word, the seat does the work*. |
+| A singular fact about machines is a placement of capacity one, refused by name | 0161: the overlay command's test for a second hub; the store's unique index. |
+| A holder of `node-uplink` is the dialect the machine runs | 0161: the host reports `uplink-<manager>` in its profile with every report; a resolution test refuses the other holder naming the capability. |
 | Holdings are derived, and the overview lists every seat | 0118: the `seats` command test, including an unheld seat. |
 | A build source on the seat records no address; an unheld seat refuses only self-hosted builds | 0111's tests. |

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/27-a-module-requires-the-mesh-resolves.md

@@ -1,10 +1,11 @@
 ---
 layer: to-be
-status: proposed
-code: []
-updated: 2026-09-26
+status: in-progress
+code: [mesh-controller internal/catalogue]
+updated: 2026-09-30
 decisions:
   - 02-DECISIONS/0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0155-a-definition-names-no-installation-and-how-that-is-checked.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0115-one-assignment-of-a-module-per-node.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0113-the-vault-makes-every-secret.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0114-a-shared-credential-rotates-over-two-credentials.md
@@ -136,6 +137,12 @@ lost is a named volume, not a directory ([ADR 0030](../../02-DECISIONS/0030-data
   the assignment says nothing;
 - **a placement**, where the assignment puts one directory elsewhere: on a second disk, or where an
   adopted machine's data already is ([ADR 0100](../../02-DECISIONS/0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md)).
+  *Built 2026-10-01 ([issue 153](../../04-ISSUES/153-an-adopted-machines-data-cannot-be-placed-where-it-is/00-report.md)):*
+  `places` on the assignment's settings, by directory id, with an owner where the data already has
+  one; and `accesses`, by access id, for the operator's data — an access has an id and its mounts
+  name it as `${access:<id>}`. Both validated as `endpoints` is: an id the definition does not
+  declare is refused. *How it is checked:* the controller's placement tests, and the
+  path-preservation proof extended to accesses.
 
 **An operator's shared data** is an access, as before ([ADR 0051](../../02-DECISIONS/0051-shared-data-is-the-operators.md)):
 never created, owned or removed by the mesh. The module requires read or read-write access. Where
@@ -171,6 +178,34 @@ make a new external key, so rotating one means an operator handing over a new va
 assignment, and the route provider answers. A public name already held by another assignment is
 refused, like any other singular thing.
 
+**Built so far, 2026-09-30** ([ADR 0155](../../02-DECISIONS/0155-a-definition-names-no-installation-and-how-that-is-checked.md)):
+the operator's value in its first form — `${setting:<key>}` in a file's content, from the assignment's
+settings layers, refused by name when nothing set it; a module told the name its route composes
+(`${bound:<route>:name}`); a build context on the git seat; and the check that no definition names an
+installation, with `names-on-purpose` for the names a definition means. The host's directory in its
+first form is [`${dir:<id>}`](../../04-ISSUES/119-a-module-definition-decides-where-its-files-live/00-report.md),
+a placed directory under the node's root. Each is this design's provider in the shape the existing
+placeholders have, not yet the one requirement form below; they are phase 1's first cases.
+
+*Phase 3, in part (2026-09-30):* every definition's **own** data directory is placed; the conversion
+moved no data, proven by resolving both catalogues with the controller's rule and comparing
+([issue 119](../../04-ISSUES/119-a-module-definition-decides-where-its-files-live/00-report.md)).
+What the mesh writes *for* a module was still placed by the definition
+([issue 174](../../04-ISSUES/174-the-meshs-own-files-for-a-module-are-placed-by-the-definition/00-report.md)),
+the gap this design answered on 2026-09-26; built later the same day: a directory saying
+`place: "mesh"` is `<root>/mesh/<module>`, a directory beneath a placed one states its path as
+`${dir:<id>}/<rest>` and moves with it, and the same proof — both catalogues resolved and compared —
+shows forty-eight definitions naming the paths they named before.
+
+*The operator's value travels only where it is asked for (2026-09-30,
+[issue 173](../../04-ISSUES/173-a-modules-settings-reach-every-fact-it-contributes/00-report.md)):*
+a setting overrides a key a contribution or a served fact declares and adds none; a file keeps taking
+any key. A provider that must tell its consumers an operator's value — a mail server's domain, an
+identity provider's issuer — declares it in what it serves as `${setting:<key>}`, and it is refused by
+name when nothing sets it. That is the contract half of this design's operator provider in the shape
+the placeholder allows: the definition says which values reach which requirement, and nothing else
+does. *How it is checked:* the unit tests named in issue 173, and the plan comparison that closed it.
+
 ## How a definition reads what was resolved
 
 **One form, naming a requirement and a field of its contract.** A definition that needs the database's
@@ -379,7 +414,9 @@ writes (`/var/lib/mesh/<module>`: sealed credentials, composed bindings) need a
 module-visible reservation. They do not: a module *requires* a `host-path` and receives a
 location; what the mesh writes for the module is the mesh's plumbing, placed where the mesh
 chooses and mounted in — never part of the module's contract. One reservation per
-requirement, `<root>/<module>/<name>`.
+requirement, `<root>/<module>/<name>`. *(Built 2026-09-30: the mesh's directory for a module is
+`<root>/mesh/<module>`, named in the definition as a placed directory and nowhere as a path —
+issue 174.)*
 
 **Resolution happens in the controller, at declaration composition.** The node receives
 concrete paths exactly as today — the wire format and the host's apply do not change for

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/28-building-the-bus.md

@@ -5,11 +5,11 @@ code:
   - mesh-catalog modules/nats
   - mesh-controller internal/catalogue
   - mesh-lab scenarios
-updated: 2026-09-27
+updated: 2026-09-28
 decisions:
   - 02-DECISIONS/0116-the-bus-is-built-in-five-steps.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0106-the-bus-is-nats.md
-  - 02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0126-a-module-declares-its-own-seats.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0074-the-wire-is-specified-not-the-types.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0079-the-foundation-seats-are-named-after-their-servers.md
@@ -535,7 +535,7 @@ it, and the beds that need a mesh living on NATS can finally run.
       The outcome carries the module name, because only the manifest says what was built and one
       message now has three readers. A failed build names none: it produced no module version, and
       the catalogue would otherwise place something that was never made.
-- [~] 4.3 an installation completes over the bus, with the same outcome as the path it replaces —
+- [x] 4.3 an installation completes over the bus, with the same outcome as the path it replaces —
       **the installer can raise it**: a foundation template that stands up the server, writes the
       server's own settings and the mesh's first user list beside them, and starts a controller
       reaching the new bus. What remains is running it, which is 4.1's bed.
@@ -655,55 +655,72 @@ healthy while reacting to nothing.
 - [ ] 5.1 the cutover bed: a mesh on AMQP with a predecessor stand-in on the deprecated broker
       moves its bus in one rollout, every node reporting on NATS afterwards, the stand-in's own
       client still connected throughout
-- [~] 5.2 the rollout: accounts composed, then the controller, every host and every runtime
+- [x] 5.2 the rollout: accounts composed, then the controller, every host and every runtime
       together; every node confirmed heard before AMQP stops.
 
-      **The readiness half is in and is the half worth having.** The move takes every node at once, so
-      there is nothing to inspect afterwards and no half to roll back — either the mesh was ready or it
-      was not. `rollout check` answers that from records, with one dial: is a bus answering, does a
-      machine hold the seat, has it been sent the composed user list, does every machine and every
-      module that speaks have a credential. Each missing thing names its own next step, because "not
-      ready" that cannot be acted on is not an answer at the point where the next step is irreversible.
-
-      **A machine with no credential is what must stop it.** It keeps running, cannot come back, and
-      afterwards there is no bus to tell it anything over.
-
-      The move itself is deliberately not written yet, and the command says so rather than pretending:
-      it waits on the check having been run against a real mesh. Writing the irreversible half before
-      the question it depends on has ever been asked of something real is how the plan's own rule about
-      beds gets broken by another route.
-
-      > **What this costs if it goes wrong, measured rather than assumed.** On the installation this is
-      > for, the old broker is also what a whole automation layer outside the mesh connects to — so it
-      > stays, as an ordinary provider of `amqp` ([ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md)),
-      > and this step is not its retirement. Nothing in a served request's path goes over the mesh's own
-      > bus: modules serve from their own containers. What a failed move costs is the mesh's ability to
-      > *change* anything — pushes, tool calls, new provisioning — until it is finished or undone. That
-      > is worth knowing before rather than after, and it is why the operator's "as long as my services
-      > keep running" is a reasonable position rather than a gamble.
-- [ ] 5.3 the mesh's own accounts removed from the deprecated broker, and then the broker itself:
-      after the rollout nothing of the mesh speaks to it, and an account nothing uses is one nobody
-      rotates. **It finishes now** ([ADR 0130](../../02-DECISIONS/0130-the-predecessor-is-ending-and-its-broker-goes-with-it.md)):
-      the predecessor is deprecated rather than kept, so once its remnants have stopped the module is
-      unassigned and the port is free. No retirement machinery — a provision with no consumers has its
-      provider unassigned, which is ADR 0127 being paid off rather than revised.
+      **Done 2026-09-28, 02:25.** Every machine reports on the new bus, the seat is held by the
+      module that provides it, the old broker is unassigned and forgotten, and every credential was
+      minted afresh at the end because two had been printed on the way. What it took, in the order
+      it was found, each fixed on the trunk before the next step: the control plane's `serve` and
+      `push` never selected the new transport (task 4.3, open until then); a machine's user was
+      granted neither the asking nor the delivery of its own consumer; the account had no JetStream
+      of its own; the control plane's client verified the bus's certificate by name instead of
+      pinning it; the seat table's rows carried no protocol, so no role's work queue was raised; the
+      build machine decided its bus from a variable its container never received; and a rotation
+      put new hashes on the bus before three machines had received their new memberships — which
+      is why there is now `rollout hand <node>` and a host adopts a delivered membership at start.
+      The bootstrap loop — a bus that can only be raised by a declaration that can only arrive
+      over that bus — was broken once, by hand: the mesh's own composed configuration started the
+      server, and the controller binary was run on the node directly until the managed container
+      could be rebuilt over the bus it was on.
 
+- [x] 5.3 **the seat changes hands as one act.** A command takes a seat and the assignment taking it
+      over, and the seat is never empty in between — the emptiness is the outage of 2026-09-27, when
+      the control plane, which finds its own bus through this seat, lost the address and looped.
+      **Built 2026-09-27** (`seat_holding`, migration 0039; design 26 says how it is checked), and used
+      live the next night to hand `mesh-broker` from the old broker's assignment to the new one's. This
+      is what 5.2 uses to move `mesh-broker` from the old
+      broker's assignment to the new one's, and it is built first ([ADR 0131](../../02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md)).
+- [x] 5.4 **the old broker and everything that named AMQP leave the mesh** ([ADR 0131](../../02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md),
+      superseding [ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md)): the two modules that
+      required `amqp` are removed, the broker's module is unassigned and removed (**done 2026-09-28**; the predecessor's own tooling, which rode the same adopted broker, went dark with it, as [ADR 0130](../../02-DECISIONS/0130-the-predecessor-is-ending-and-its-broker-goes-with-it.md) accepted), registration refuses
+      a manifest that provides or requires `amqp`, and a whole-catalogue check asserts none does. Not
+      a retirement condition — a decision, taken, with the operator's "I don't care if the predecessor
+      breaks" on record ([ADR 0130](../../02-DECISIONS/0130-the-predecessor-is-ending-and-its-broker-goes-with-it.md)).
       Retiring with it: the build outcome's second announcement under the module's own name, which
-      exists only so a catalogue deployed before the rename and one deployed after both hear it.
+      existed only so a catalogue deployed before the rename and one after both heard it.
 
       > **The remote tooling goes with it too.** The predecessor's own mesh talks over that broker, so
       > shutting it down ends the path that reaches this installation's machines from a workstation.
-      > The rollout has to be driven from the node, or driven before the broker stops — which is a
-      > sequencing constraint on 5.2 and not an afterthought.
+      > The rollout is driven from the node, or before the broker stops — a sequencing constraint on
+      > 5.2, not an afterthought.
+- [x] 5.5 **the AMQP transport is deleted from the control plane and the hosts**. One bus, nothing
+      to select ([ADR 0131](../../02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md)).
 
-> **5.4 is gone, and was wrong from ADR 0127 onward.** It read "the deprecated broker retires
-> when its condition holds — no client connected for the period the operator sets", which is
-> ADR 0106's framing of it as a compatibility module with an end date.
-> [ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) settled that it is an
-> **ordinary provider** of the `amqp` provision, like any module answering a backing service:
-> no seat, not foundation, and **no retirement condition**, because the day its last client
-> disappears is not a day anything is waiting for. Removed rather than reworded — a step that
-> waits for a condition nobody set would sit open forever.
+      **Done 2026-09-28.** The control plane's old consume loop, build request, tool call, management
+      API and account scoping went, and the host's old dialling and enrolment paths with them; a
+      membership or token naming any other bus is refused before anything is sent. Nothing selects a
+      transport any more: the variable that once did (`MESH_BUS_NATS`) now only names where the
+      control plane reads its own bus credential, the way any module reads a secret. **Checked by the
+      build**: neither repository's module file names the AMQP client library, so a line that still
+      used it would not compile. The store-window guarantee ([issue 083](../../04-ISSUES/083-other-control-messages-are-lost-while-the-store-restarts/00-report.md))
+      is tested against a bus-less fake rather than the old transport's memory, which is what let
+      that memory go — the one thing it did that the stream does not (superseding a held report) is
+      the staleness check on the message itself (design 25 §3).
+
+      Found on the way: **no build had ever recorded what it stood on.** A recipe reads its base from
+      a build argument, so the digest was never in the file the builder derived edges from, and every
+      order that says *bases first* — `build --on`, `build --behind`, the merge follow-up of
+      [issue 131](../../04-ISSUES/131-nothing-tells-the-mesh-a-source-moved/00-report.md) — walked a
+      graph with no edges. The builder now reports the bases it was handed, the control plane records
+      them by artifact path, and the graph is read from the newest build of each module — a recorded
+      manifest carries no `build.on`, so the edge is derived from the build or it does not exist.
+
+> **The old 5.4 note is history.** It recorded that a retirement *condition* was wrong from
+> [ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) onward, which framed the old broker
+> as an ordinary provider with no end. [ADR 0131](../../02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md) ends that
+> framing in turn: the broker is not kept as a provider either, because AMQP is not a provision. Both
+> readings are kept here so the two reversals can be read in order.
 
 **Done when.** Every node reports on NATS, and nothing of the mesh's own is left connected to the
 deprecated broker.

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/30-the-mesh-updates-itself-on-a-push.md

@@ -2,8 +2,10 @@
 layer: to-be
 status: proposed
 code: []
-updated: 2026-09-27
+updated: 2026-10-01
 decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0162-a-merge-produces-a-tiered-plan-the-mesh-keeps.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0157-a-build-says-what-it-does-on-the-bus-as-it-happens.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0120-a-roster-fact-carries-its-format-as-a-template.md
 ---
@@ -114,6 +116,19 @@ automate the freeze.
   (this is how the uplink managers and the re-registrations above were done). Only image-bearing
   modules need the build machine, which narrows what the deadlock above can block.
 
+## What a merge does now (2026-10-01)
+
+Revision, [ADR 0162](../../02-DECISIONS/0162-a-merge-produces-a-tiered-plan-the-mesh-keeps.md). The
+trigger exists: the forge announces a merge on the bus and the controller acts on it (ADR 0157 made
+the build narrate; this makes the merge a plan). A module's dependencies are one relation in the
+catalogue — `depends-on` edges of four kinds: stands-on, packages, built-by, declared. A merge takes
+what changed and everything reachable from it along those edges, sorts the set into tiers, writes the
+plan to the store, asks the first tier and returns. Each outcome advances the plan; a tier whose
+rolled-out modules a later tier is built by waits until the machines report them applied; a
+controller replaced mid-plan resumes from the store. `status` lists open plans and names one that
+has waited too long. The transition discipline for breaking changes in the list above is still
+unwritten, and still the next thing.
+
 ## Why now, and why not yet
 
 **Why it matters:** self-update is the difference between a mesh a person maintains by typing

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/32-what-a-module-declares.md

@@ -1,17 +1,30 @@
 ---
 layer: to-be
-status: proposed
-code: []
-updated: 2026-09-27
+status: in-progress
+code:
+  - mesh-controller internal/catalogue/declaration.go
+  - mesh-controller internal/catalogue/manifest.go
+  - mesh-controller internal/link/serve.go
+  - mesh-controller internal/link/bus.go
+  - mesh-controller internal/broker/nats.go
+  - mesh-controller internal/inventory/nodes.go
+  - mesh-host internal/apply/apply.go
+  - mesh-tools src/main.ts
+  - mesh-catalog modules/mesh-catalog
+updated: 2026-09-28
 decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0160-the-mesh-issues-an-assignments-subjects-and-a-runtime-serves-what-it-is-issued.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0126-a-module-declares-its-own-seats.md
-  - 02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0128-the-mesh-bus-is-required-not-ambient.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0106-the-bus-is-nats.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0041-events-are-a-relationship.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0083-one-push-leaves-the-mesh-consistent.md
   - 02-DECISIONS/0129-a-seat-carries-the-protocol-of-its-role.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0135-a-module-version-prepares-its-state-before-it-runs.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0136-a-step-gates-its-module-not-the-machine.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0134-the-mesh-says-what-it-applied.md
 ---
 
 # 32. What a module declares, and what the bus makes of it
@@ -108,6 +121,12 @@ and a module consuming one event from two emitters could tell them apart only by
 The subject already carries the emitter, so the key a module sees names it too — which makes a
 disagreement between a manifest and the code a typo rather than a category error.
 
+*2026-10-01 ([ADR 0160](../../02-DECISIONS/0160-the-mesh-issues-an-assignments-subjects-and-a-runtime-serves-what-it-is-issued.md)):* where a name lands is now
+*issued* to each assignment as a membership the controller publishes, rather than derived by a rule
+the runtime carries; a module still declares only names, and gains one fact about itself — whether its
+instances are interchangeable — which decides whether the mesh issues it the module's plain subject
+beside its machine's.
+
 ## 2. Three namespaces, and nothing else
 
 **Its own** — `mesh.mod.<module>.>`. Its events and its tools. Nothing else may publish into it,
@@ -258,10 +277,30 @@ queue.
 and publishes it last-per-subject. A node that was away gets exactly the current one, never a
 queue of superseded ones, and a replayed older one is refused by sequence.
 
+**A version prepares its state before it runs.** *Built 2026-09-28.* A module version may declare an
+entrypoint that brings its state to the shape that version needs — the same vocabulary as the entrypoints it declares for its
+tools and its provisioner, and nothing about how a machine runs it. The mesh runs that entrypoint as it
+runs the module's own code, to completion, in the module's own context, and a version whose preparation
+did not succeed does not run: the step gates that module and nothing else on the machine
+([ADR 0136](../../02-DECISIONS/0136-a-step-gates-its-module-not-the-machine.md)), and the rollout stops
+at the first machine that did not take it
+([ADR 0135](../../02-DECISIONS/0135-a-module-version-prepares-its-state-before-it-runs.md), superseding
+[ADR 0133](../../02-DECISIONS/0133-a-module-owns-its-migrations-and-the-mesh-owns-when-they-run.md)).
+Once per state, and the mesh derives what a state is: a consumer is a module on a machine, so what the
+mesh provisions is per consumer and preparation is too. No level to choose, and no race to lock against.
+
 **Applying is reported to a role.** The host applies and reports to the `mesh-controller` seat —
 not to an address it was given at genesis. Held and retried while the store restarts
 ([ADR 0083](../../02-DECISIONS/0083-one-push-leaves-the-mesh-consistent.md)).
 
+**And the mesh says what it applied.** *Built 2026-09-28.* A report is control traffic only the control plane reads, so the
+chain above went dark at the moment it touched a machine: nothing said which version a machine now runs,
+or that it refused to. The control plane states those as facts under its own seat's namespace, when what
+a machine runs changes rather than on every convergence pass, and anything that cares subscribes the way
+the catalogue subscribes to `built` ([ADR 0134](../../02-DECISIONS/0134-the-mesh-says-what-it-applied.md)).
+The facts are second-hand by design — one emitter, one ordering — and a machine that cannot reach the bus
+produces none, so absence is not health.
+
 What disappears across that chain is every address. No webhook URL, no registered callback, no
 "which node is the builder on", no controller endpoint baked into a joining node. That is the
 class of bug
@@ -357,7 +396,7 @@ controller — because the bus's accounts are configuration rather than somethin
 creates, so there is no provisioner process in the path and nothing waiting on a bus account in
 order to make bus accounts. A module that runs a NATS server of its own and offers it as a
 backing service provides **`nats`**, exactly as the deprecated broker provides `amqp`
-([ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md)).
+([ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseded by [ADR 0131](../../02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md): AMQP is not a provision, and everything speaks to the `mesh-broker` seat)).
 
 They are never the same name. A manifest saying `nats` could otherwise mean either the mesh's
 nervous system or a private queue, and the difference between those is the whole architecture.
@@ -427,7 +466,7 @@ it as an ordinary module once the registry exists.
 
 So there are exactly two things the normal path cannot make, both at genesis, both ending the
 moment the mesh can mint for itself: **the bus's own accounts** (§the bootstrap argument in
-[ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseding [ADR 0125](../../02-DECISIONS/0125-the-bus-is-the-only-broker.md)) — a provisioner is a module and
+[ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseded by [ADR 0131](../../02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md): AMQP is not a provision, and everything speaks to the `mesh-broker` seat) (superseding [ADR 0125](../../02-DECISIONS/0125-the-bus-is-the-only-broker.md)) — a provisioner is a module and
 needs an account before it can run) and **the vault's own credential**. Any third exception is a
 design failure, and naming these two is what makes a third one visible.
 
@@ -439,6 +478,10 @@ it is the residue of a question the rest of §8 answers and the part a fingerpri
 **Whether a module may declare a seat it does not itself claim** — the contract as one thing, the
 implementation as another, which is how two competing implementations would ever exist.
 
+**Whether a container should have a readiness notion.** Only an action carries `verify`, so a step that
+must run once a service *answers* — seeding through its own API — cannot be declared at all. Named here
+because the steps above make the gap obvious, not because they caused it.
+
 **Whether `consumes` naming another module couples too tightly.** It is kept here deliberately —
 an event's provenance is its meaning — but a consumer of `billing.order.placed` does depend on
 billing existing under that name.
@@ -447,6 +490,11 @@ billing existing under that name.
 
 - **A manifest holds no subject.** A catalogue test: no manifest contains a string matching the
   subject grammar. The rule is worthless if it is followed by convention.
+- **A preparation is given what the module is given.** A composition test: what the preparation
+  entrypoint receives equals what the module's own code receives, asserted rather than written twice —
+  which is the drift a hand-written step invites, three times over in the catalogue today.
+- **A convergence that changed nothing says nothing.** Two identical reports, one emitted fact: what is
+  guarded against is a fact per minute per machine, which is a stream nobody reads.
 - **Permissions are exactly the three namespaces.** A composition test per module: the derived
   permission set equals what its declaration implies, and a hand-written addition to it fails.
 - **A sender cannot read the queue it writes to.** A bed: a module declaring `uses` is refused

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/33-the-tools-the-mesh-answers.md

@@ -0,0 +1,186 @@
+---
+layer: to-be
+status: implemented
+code: [mesh-controller, mesh-tools]
+updated: 2026-10-01
+decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0160-the-mesh-issues-an-assignments-subjects-and-a-runtime-serves-what-it-is-issued.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0159-a-tool-call-names-the-machine-and-a-holder-serves-its-seats-verbs.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0154-the-meshs-own-verbs-are-the-controller-seats-tools.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0129-a-seat-carries-the-protocol-of-its-role.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0095-the-control-plane-is-the-way-to-ask-a-module.md
+---
+
+# 33 — The tools the mesh answers
+
+**An agent can call the mesh's tools and cannot find out what they are.** Both halves were measured
+on the live mesh on 2026-09-28: a client holding an operator credential connected to the bus, asked a
+module for its repositories and got them; the same client's request for the tool list found nothing
+serving it. The transport works, the account model works, the adapter that speaks the agent protocol
+works. What is missing is the mesh being able to say what it can do.
+
+This design is the answer to that question, and it has three families in it, because a tool belongs to
+whoever is accountable for answering it.
+
+## 1. Three families, and why the split is not arbitrary
+
+| Family | Addressed to | Where the definition lives | Example |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| A **role's** tools | the seat: `mesh.seat.<seat>.tool.<verb>` | the seat's protocol, in the mesh's records | ask *the forge* to list its repositories |
+| A **module's** tools | the module: `mesh.mod.<module>.tool.<name>` | that module's code | ask *this gitea* for `gitea_list_repos` |
+| The **mesh's** own verbs | the `mesh-controller` seat | the seat's protocol, as above | `status`, `push`, `build`, `assign` |
+
+The split follows accountability. A role is something the mesh guarantees exactly one holder of, so
+what the role answers is the mesh's to define and a holder's to implement
+([ADR 0132](../../02-DECISIONS/0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md)). A module's
+own tools are nobody's business but the module's, and their definitions live where they are
+implemented, because a copy kept anywhere else drifts from the code that answers.
+
+The mesh's own verbs are the third family only in where they come from, not in kind: the control plane
+holds a seat like anything else, and its tools are that seat's. This is what keeps them addressable
+while the control plane is being replaced, which is the moment they are most needed.
+
+**Both names for one capability is deliberate and bounded to this.** A forge holding the `git` seat
+answers the role's `list_repos` and its own `gitea_list_repos`, because the same module may run
+without the seat — a second instance, kept for one purpose — and then only the second name is true.
+The caller chooses which question it is asking. Nothing else in the mesh gets two names.
+
+## 2. What a seat's tool is
+
+A verb, what it does, and the schema of its arguments and its answer. A name alone is not callable by
+something that has never seen the mesh before, which is the whole population this surface exists for.
+
+The protocol a seat carries today is three lists of bare verbs
+([ADR 0129](../../02-DECISIONS/0129-a-seat-carries-the-protocol-of-its-role.md)), and it must widen to
+carry the rest. Two constraints on that widening:
+
+- **It lives in the mesh's records, not in the control plane's binary.** Today a seat's protocol comes
+  from compiled defaults, merged in as a row is read, because the seat rows never gained the columns.
+  Discovery that reads a binary is discovery that disagrees with the mesh the moment the two are on
+  different versions.
+- **The schema is stated in the form an agent protocol already uses**, so nothing translates between a
+  seat's idea of an argument and the caller's. A translation layer would be a second definition of
+  what a tool is.
+
+## 3. Holding a seat means serving its tools
+
+A module may not occupy a seat unless it serves every verb that seat declares. This joins the
+conditions of holding that already exist — providing what the seat delivers, being assigned at the
+seat's scope — and is refused the same way: at registration and at handover, naming the verbs that are
+missing rather than the fact that something is.
+
+A module knows which seats it claims, so knowing which tools it must serve is not a discovery problem
+for the module: the seat says, the module implements, and anything beyond that is its own.
+
+## 4. Addressing a node-scoped seat
+
+A seat's subject is flat today — `mesh.seat.<seat>.<kind>.<verb>` — which is correct for a seat the
+mesh has one holder of and wrong for the six node-scoped seats, where one subject would reach every
+machine's holder and the holders' queue group would hand the call to whichever answered first. A
+node-scoped seat's tool therefore carries the node it is asked of. Nothing about a mesh-scoped seat
+changes.
+
+*2026-10-01 ([ADR 0159](../../02-DECISIONS/0159-a-tool-call-names-the-machine-and-a-holder-serves-its-seats-verbs.md)):*
+the same shape now serves a **module's** tool on several machines, which had the queue-group fault
+this section describes for seats: each instance also serves `mesh.mod.<module>.tool.<tool>.<node>`,
+a caller writes `<module>.<tool>@<node>`, and every answer names the machine that gave it. And §3 is
+built for every holder, not only the controller: the credential names the seats a module claims and
+their verbs, the runtime serves each with the tool of the same name on the seat's subject, and the
+bus admits it only where the module holds the seat. *Later the same day ([ADR 0160](../../02-DECISIONS/0160-the-mesh-issues-an-assignments-subjects-and-a-runtime-serves-what-it-is-issued.md)):*
+the subjects a holder serves, and a module's own, stop being derived in the runtime and are issued to
+the assignment as a membership the controller publishes; the shape stays, the deciding moves.
+
+## 5. Discovery
+
+**What a role answers is a read.** The seats and their protocols are records, so the list is a query
+against the mesh's own store: no call to a module in the path, nothing that has to be running, and an
+answer that stays true while a holder is restarting or being replaced.
+
+**What a module answers comes from the module.** Its definitions live in its code, so it is asked, and
+the answer is as available as the module is — which is the right coupling for a tool that only exists
+while that module does.
+
+A caller therefore gets one list assembled from two sources, and the difference is visible in it: a
+role's tool names a seat, a module's names a module. An agent that wants to survive a holder being
+replaced binds to the first.
+
+## 6. What serves this to an agent
+
+A module the mesh assigns to the machine where the agent runs, holding a credential the mesh minted,
+with authority derived from what it may call — not a program started by hand with a credential printed
+to a terminal. The adapter itself already exists and is thin by design; what changes is that it stops
+being something a person carries and becomes something the mesh runs, on a node, like everything else.
+
+An agent's authority can then be role-shaped: *the forge's tools*, rather than a list of
+module-specific names that changes the day the forge is replaced.
+
+*Decided and designed on 2026-09-30:* the module is the console —
+[ADR 0152](../../02-DECISIONS/0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md),
+[34 — The console](34-the-console.md). It builds the second half of §5 now (a module's tools are
+asked of the module, through a `tools` verb every runtime answers) and lists a role's tools when the
+records carry them.
+
+## 7. Versioning
+
+A seat's tools are an interface and change like one. Additive within a version. A change that would
+break a caller takes the version token the subject already has room for, and the two versions run side
+by side until nothing is bound to the old one.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+- **A holder missing a verb cannot take the seat.** One test per condition of holding, as the existing
+  conditions have, and the live refusal names the verbs.
+- **A verb nobody declared is a subject nobody may use.** The bus grants are derived from the seat's
+  protocol already, and the golden composition of the user list is what keeps that honest: a holder is
+  granted exactly the seat's verbs, a user of the seat exactly the publish side.
+- **Discovery needs no running module.** The test for a role's tools reads records and asserts the
+  answer equals what the seats declare — if it needed a module up, it would not be a read.
+- **Two nodes holding one node-scoped seat derive two addresses.** Checked by the same test as the rest
+  of the subject table.
+
+## What is built, 2026-09-30
+
+Under [ADR 0154](../../02-DECISIONS/0154-the-meshs-own-verbs-are-the-controller-seats-tools.md): §2's
+two constraints (the protocol in the store's row, seeded additively; a verb with description and
+schema, a bare name still accepted), §3 for the mesh's seats (holding refused by naming the missing
+verbs), §4 (a node-scoped seat's tool carries the node as its last subject token; a user publishes
+`*`), and the third family — twelve verbs on the `mesh-controller` seat, each running the command it
+names in the controller's own binary. §5's first half is served rather than read: the seat's `tools`
+verb answers every seat's tools from the records, because the console cannot read the store; the
+console lists a role's tools beside the modules' own and resolves `<seat>.<verb>` to the seat when the
+seat declares that verb. Which verbs each *other* seat serves stays a decision per seat, still untaken.
+
+## What shipped, 2026-09-30
+
+mesh-controller PRs 166 and 167, mesh-tools PR 21. Verified on the live mesh the same evening: the
+console on a workstation lists the twelve verbs as `mesh-controller.<verb>` beside 67 module tools, and
+`mesh-controller.nodes` and `mesh-controller.status` answer through it with what the commands print.
+
+Two things shipped bent. **The grant arrived after the holder started**: the controller composes the
+bus's user list and a push delivers it, so the first controller to serve its seat subscribed before
+the broker's list named the grant, the server refused all twelve subscriptions, and the client never
+retried — a holder now rebinds a refused subscription every thirty seconds (PR 167), and a controller
+roll-out that adds a grant is followed by a push to the broker node. **A JSON verb's answer was parsed
+from both output streams**, so `status --json`'s warnings hid the document as data; the answer is now
+parsed from standard output alone (mesh-controller PR 168, pending). The `output` field carried it
+either way.
+
+What stays as designed and not built: which verbs any *other* seat serves, and §3 for module-declared
+seats' schemas beyond the names their manifests already list.
+
+## What this does not settle
+
+- Which verbs each seat should serve. That is a decision per seat, and the reason to do it slowly: a
+  seat's tools bind every future holder.
+- Whether a module's own tool definitions should also be recorded when a build resolves its manifest.
+  There is an argument for it — the mesh could then answer for a module that is down — and an argument
+  against, which is that a recorded copy of a live definition is a copy that can be wrong.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0132](../../02-DECISIONS/0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md) — the decision this designs
+- [ADR 0129](../../02-DECISIONS/0129-a-seat-carries-the-protocol-of-its-role.md) — a seat carries the protocol of its role
+- [ADR 0095](../../02-DECISIONS/0095-the-control-plane-is-the-way-to-ask-a-module.md) — a tool call passes one process where an audit belongs
+- [`26-the-seats.md`](26-the-seats.md) — what a seat is, how it is held and handed over
+- [`25-the-bus-on-nats.md`](25-the-bus-on-nats.md) §7 — a person's account, their inbox, and the adapter

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/34-the-console.md

@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
+---
+layer: to-be
+status: implemented
+code: [mesh-catalog, mesh-tools, mesh-controller]
+updated: 2026-10-01
+decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0160-the-mesh-issues-an-assignments-subjects-and-a-runtime-serves-what-it-is-issued.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0159-a-tool-call-names-the-machine-and-a-holder-serves-its-seats-verbs.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0132-a-seat-carries-the-tools-its-holder-must-serve.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0095-the-control-plane-is-the-way-to-ask-a-module.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0035-one-implementation-several-surfaces.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0034-the-local-account-owns-the-mesh.md
+---
+
+# 34 — The console
+
+**The mesh's tools, on the machine a person sits at, served by a module the mesh assigned there.**
+An agent reaches them over MCP on the machine's loopback; a person reaches the same endpoint. Nothing is
+installed by hand, nothing is configured with an address, and the mesh knows the surface exists because
+it put it there ([ADR 0152](../../02-DECISIONS/0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md)).
+
+## 1. What it is
+
+A module, `mesh-console`, in the catalogue. Its image is the tool runtime's own — the client that
+already speaks the bus as a command line and as an MCP server — started in a mode that reads the
+module's credential and listens on loopback. It has no state, no provision, no seat. What it needs is
+the bus, which it gets the way every module does: a credential the mesh minted for `<node>.mesh-console`,
+sealed to the machine, delivered as the module's own secret.
+
+Its manifest says three things nothing else in the catalogue says together:
+
+- `invokes: ["*"]` — it calls every tool on the mesh, and the bus grants exactly that publish side;
+- `listens` on a port `from: machine` — the filter opens nothing for it, because loopback is not outside;
+- no `emits`, no `consumes`, no `tools` — it answers nothing on the bus and nobody can address it there.
+
+## 2. What it serves, and to whom
+
+**One endpoint, `POST /mcp` on the machine's loopback**, speaking MCP over HTTP: `initialize`,
+`tools/list`, `tools/call`. An agent on the machine is pointed at it once — the address is the machine's
+own and never changes — and sees every tool the mesh can say it has. A person at a terminal uses the
+same endpoint through the `mesh` client, or through anything that can make an HTTP request; the client
+needs no credential, because the console holds it.
+
+**The endpoint is the machine's login.** It binds `127.0.0.1` and nothing else. Whoever can connect is
+on the machine, and whoever is on the machine is the account that owns the mesh there
+([ADR 0034](../../02-DECISIONS/0034-the-local-account-owns-the-mesh.md),
+[ADR 0144](../../02-DECISIONS/0144-anything-on-a-machine-may-call-anything-on-it.md)). There is no
+token, no login page and no second identity, on purpose: a credential a person had to carry to reach
+their own machine's console would be the arrangement this replaces, moved one hop.
+
+## 3. How it knows what the mesh can do
+
+Design [33](33-the-tools-the-mesh-answers.md) §5 splits discovery in two: a role's tools are read from
+the mesh's records, a module's own are asked of the module. The console builds the second half now and
+reads the first when it exists.
+
+**Every tool runtime answers `tools`.** The runtime that serves a module's tools also serves one verb of
+its own under that module's name, `mesh.mod.<module>.tool.tools`, answering the module's tool names,
+descriptions and argument schemas — the definitions from the code that answers them, and from nowhere
+else. A module may not name a tool of its own `tools`; the runtime refuses the collision at load.
+
+**The console asks the catalogue which modules the mesh holds, then asks each.** `catalog_modules`
+answers the roster; one `tools` request per module, in parallel, answers the list. The bus refuses at
+once a request nothing serves, so a module that is not running costs nothing and is named in the answer
+as not answering, rather than silently absent — *silence and success must never look alike*. The list is
+kept for a short while and refreshed, so an agent asking on every turn does not fan out on every turn.
+
+**Every module tool takes the machine to ask** (*2026-10-01*, [ADR 0159](../../02-DECISIONS/0159-a-tool-call-names-the-machine-and-a-holder-serves-its-seats-verbs.md)):
+an optional `node` the console lists on each one, puts into the subject and never hands to the module,
+for a module that runs on several machines; without it whichever instance answers first does, and the
+console appends *answered by <machine>* to every answer. A seat's verb takes none; the seat's scope
+decides. *Later the same day ([ADR 0160](../../02-DECISIONS/0160-the-mesh-issues-an-assignments-subjects-and-a-runtime-serves-what-it-is-issued.md)):* the console composes no
+subject at all; each tool's subject comes with the listing, and a stateful module on two machines is
+listed once per machine because the mesh issued it no plain subject.
+
+**A tool that was not listed can still be called.** Listing is discovery; calling is the grant. An agent
+that knows a tool's name asks for it by `<module>.<tool>` and the module answers or the bus says why not.
+
+**What is missing from the list, and until when.** A role's tools and the mesh's own verbs — `status`,
+`push`, `assign` — are the `mesh-controller` seat's under ADR 0132 and are not served yet; their three
+prerequisites are listed in that record. When the seat serves them, the console lists them beside the
+modules' own, and the person stops opening a shell for the mesh's own questions. Until then the console
+says so in its handshake.
+
+## 4. Where it runs
+
+On whichever machines an operator sits at, by assignment. It is not on the control node by default and
+does not need to be: it reaches the bus like any module, from anywhere in the mesh. A machine that is
+not a node cannot have it, which is the right refusal — the mesh reaches what it declares, and a
+workstation that wants the console joins first.
+
+The person's credential and the `mesh` client (design [25](25-the-bus-on-nats.md) §7) remain the path
+for a machine that is not a node, and the path to a mesh not yet far enough along to assign anything.
+
+## 5. Removing it
+
+Unassigning the console from a machine revokes its bus account at the next composition and stops the
+container; nothing is left on the machine that could still connect. An agent pointed at the loopback
+address gets a refused connection, which is the truthful answer.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+| Check | Defends |
+|---|---|
+| a module invoking one tool may publish that subject and no other tool's; `*` may publish every one; neither may publish an event or subscribe what it did not consume | ADR 0152, the grant |
+| a module registering two tools answers three names to `tools`, with schemas; a module naming its own `tools` is refused at load | ADR 0152, discovery |
+| against a real bus: two modules up, a third held and not running — the console lists the two and names the third as not answering | ADR 0152, silence is not success |
+| a call through the console's endpoint reaches a module over the bus and the answer is the module's own, unshaped | ADR 0035, a surface decides nothing |
+| on the live mesh: the console assigned to a workstation answers `tools/list` on loopback and a call to the forge returns repositories | the exit of work-order step 3 |
+| the composed filter for a machine carrying the console opens no port for it | ADR 0144 |
+
+## What shipped, 2026-09-30
+
+Everything above, the same day: mesh-controller PR 164 (`invokes`, `module check`), mesh-tools PR 20
+(`mesh serve`, the `tools` verb), mesh-catalog PR 181 (`mesh-console`). Verified on the live mesh: the
+console assigned to a workstation answered `tools/list` on its loopback with 62 tools from the modules
+whose runtimes had been rebuilt to answer `tools`, named 36 modules as not answering (modules that serve
+no tools, and modules whose new runtime the mesh records rather than rolls out), and a `tools/call` of
+the forge's `gitea_list_repos` returned repositories. An agent on that machine reaches it as an HTTP
+MCP server and reports it connected. The mesh assigned the declared port unchanged, which is what a
+machine with nothing else on it does; the console binds whatever it is given.
+
+Two things shipped bent, both stated in [`00-as-is/13-the-console.md`](../00-as-is/13-the-console.md):
+the person's client through the console (`--console`) exists and was exercised in the test suite, not
+on the live mesh; and a module registered from the catalogue by hand recorded its source as a URL rather
+than as a path on the git seat, because `--self` takes the forge path form — the rebuild-on-merge still
+matched it by URL.
+
+## What this does not settle
+
+- Narrowing a console's grant per assignment. ADR 0046 makes it a setting; nothing reads one yet.
+- The mesh's own verbs on the bus. Design 33's third family; this document only says where they appear
+  once they exist.
+- A person's identity behind the console. The mesh sees the console's account; design 15 keeps the
+  question open.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0152](../../02-DECISIONS/0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md) — the decision
+- [33 — The tools the mesh answers](33-the-tools-the-mesh-answers.md) — what the console lists
+- [25 — The bus on NATS](25-the-bus-on-nats.md) §7 — the person's client this makes a module of
+- [issue 147](../../04-ISSUES/147-the-operators-tools-still-dial-the-bus-that-was-removed/00-report.md) — the symptom

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/35-reading-the-record.md

@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
+---
+layer: to-be
+status: implemented
+code: [mesh-catalog modules/records]
+updated: 2026-09-30
+decisions:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0153-the-record-is-read-by-a-module-and-the-console-lists-it.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0025-the-design-record-is-read-not-copied.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md
+---
+
+# 35 — Reading the record
+
+**The design record, answered from a checkout the mesh keeps, at the commit it read.** A module,
+`records`, holds a working copy of a repository of markdown — this one, for this mesh — and answers
+where a phrase appears, what a document says, what a folder holds and where the copy stands. The
+console lists those answers beside every other tool
+([ADR 0153](../../02-DECISIONS/0153-the-record-is-read-by-a-module-and-the-console-lists-it.md)).
+
+## 1. What it keeps, and why that is not a copy
+
+A git checkout, cloned from the forge that holds the `git` seat, brought up to date on every merge the
+forge announces and every ten minutes besides. The bytes are the repository's; nothing is derived
+from them and stored. What [ADR 0025](../../02-DECISIONS/0025-the-design-record-is-read-not-copied.md)
+refused was a second store that is *searched* while the first is *edited*, drifting silently. A
+checkout cannot drift; it can lag, and the lag is in every answer as the commit it was read at and
+in `records_status` as when it was last brought up to date.
+
+The checkout is reset to the origin on every sync, never merged: it is the mesh's, so a local change
+is nobody's.
+
+## 2. What it answers
+
+| tool | answers |
+|---|---|
+| `records_search` | every place a phrase appears, as written and case-insensitively: document, line, the nearest heading above it; bounded, and says when it was |
+| `records_read` | one document, whole, or its first part with a note when very long |
+| `records_list` | what a folder holds: sub-folders and documents |
+| `records_status` | repository, forge, commit and its date, last sync, document count, last error |
+| `records_sync` | bring the checkout up to date now |
+
+No ranking and no summary, on purpose: a record is found by its own words, and the reasoning is in
+the document, not in the tool.
+
+## 3. What it is told, and what it refuses to guess
+
+Three things, none from a manifest ([ADR 0112](../../02-DECISIONS/0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md)):
+the directory its checkout lives in (a resource the mesh gives it), the forge's address (the `git`
+provision's binding, written into a file as `scheme://host:port`), and the repository's path on the
+forge (a **setting**, `{"repository": "<owner>/<name>"}`). Without the third it serves no tools and its
+log says so. Public repositories only; it holds no credential.
+
+## 4. How it is found
+
+The console asks every module what it serves and lists `records_search` with a description that says
+when to call it — *search the literal words of a symptom or a term before forming a hypothesis*. That
+is 0025's second half in today's mesh: there is no store to be beside, and an agent choosing from a
+tool list is the search.
+
+## 5. Where it runs
+
+Anywhere a node has the forge in reach; one assignment is enough, and a second on another machine is
+harmless. The mesh session of design 15, when it exists, calls this rather than reading for itself.
+
+## How it is checked
+
+| Check | Defends |
+|---|---|
+| a phrase in one document of a repository the test makes comes back from that document, with the commit; a second commit on the origin is pulled and the next answer names it | ADR 0025's check, ADR 0153 |
+| a path outside the checkout is refused; an empty search is refused | the reader reads the repository and nothing else |
+| a sync against an unreachable origin leaves the checkout standing and says why | silence and success never look alike |
+| live: through the console, `records_search` for a phrase that appears only in a design document here returns it | issue 006's closing check |
+
+## What shipped, 2026-09-30
+
+mesh-catalog PR 183, then PR 185. Verified on the live mesh the same evening: `records` assigned to the
+control node with `{"repository": …}` as its setting, its checkout at the repository's `main` with 478
+documents, its five tools listed by the console beside every other tool, and — ADR 0025's check —
+`records_search` for a phrase from this document's title returned it from where it is written, with
+the commit. The first live search missed: the phrase chosen from ADR 0025 straddled a line break under
+emphasis, and the reader matched single lines. PR 185 matches a line together with the next and
+ignores emphasis marks, which the module's test now covers; until it rolls, a phrase that wraps is one
+to shorten.
+
+The reader's `consumes` names the forge module's event rather than the `git` seat, because the seat
+declares none; a merge into the repository was seen and pulled within seconds.
+
+## What this does not settle
+
+- Ranking or meaning. A search that understands a question is the session's job, not the reader's.
+- A private repository. That is a credential the module would have to hold, and a decision about
+  what may read what.
+
+## References
+
+- [ADR 0153](../../02-DECISIONS/0153-the-record-is-read-by-a-module-and-the-console-lists-it.md)
+- [ADR 0025](../../02-DECISIONS/0025-the-design-record-is-read-not-copied.md)
+- [34 — The console](34-the-console.md) — what lists it
+- [issue 006](../../04-ISSUES/006-hq-is-not-indexed-into-the-knowledge-base/00-report.md)

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/README.md

@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ document is written and this one's status becomes `implemented`.
 | [`28-building-the-bus.md`](28-building-the-bus.md) | **Proposed.** The five steps of the bus work in the order their dependencies allow, each ending at a bed — with the surface measured, so no step's size is a guess | [ADR 0116](../../02-DECISIONS/0116-the-bus-is-built-in-five-steps.md), [ADR 0106](../../02-DECISIONS/0106-the-bus-is-nats.md), [ADR 0074](../../02-DECISIONS/0074-the-wire-is-specified-not-the-types.md) |
 | [`29-a-node-has-operator-accounts.md`](29-a-node-has-operator-accounts.md) | **Proposed.** The mesh models machines but not the humans on them: a node gains operator accounts, and a resource may live under a home owned by its account — what would own ~/.ssh, dotfiles and ~/.config when HAL retires | [ADR 0112](../../02-DECISIONS/0112-a-module-definition-names-no-node-mesh-or-path.md), [ADR 0051](../../02-DECISIONS/0051-shared-data-is-the-operators.md) |
 
-| [`32-what-a-module-declares.md`](32-what-a-module-declares.md) | **Proposed.** What a module declares and what the bus derives from it: three namespaces, subjects from local names, queues never declared, the five relationships, and the build-publish-deploy lifecycle on one bus | [ADR 0126](../../02-DECISIONS/0126-a-module-declares-its-own-seats.md), [ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md) (superseding [ADR 0125](../../02-DECISIONS/0125-the-bus-is-the-only-broker.md)), [ADR 0041](../../02-DECISIONS/0041-events-are-a-relationship.md) |
+| [`32-what-a-module-declares.md`](32-what-a-module-declares.md) | **Proposed.** What a module declares and what the bus derives from it: three namespaces, subjects from local names, queues never declared, the five relationships, and the build-publish-deploy lifecycle on one bus | [ADR 0126](../../02-DECISIONS/0126-a-module-declares-its-own-seats.md), [ADR 0127](../../02-DECISIONS/0127-amqp-is-a-provision-not-the-bus.md), superseded by [ADR 0131](../../02-DECISIONS/0131-everything-on-the-mesh-speaks-to-the-broker-seat.md) (superseding [ADR 0125](../../02-DECISIONS/0125-the-bus-is-the-only-broker.md)), [ADR 0041](../../02-DECISIONS/0041-events-are-a-relationship.md) |
 
 ## Not yet written
 

04-ISSUES/006-hq-is-not-indexed-into-the-knowledge-base/00-report.md

@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
 ---
-status: located
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-08-23
-located-in: [hal, hq]
-fixed-by:
-amended-design: 02-DECISIONS/0025-the-design-record-is-read-not-copied.md
+located-in: [mesh-catalog modules/records, mesh-catalog modules/mesh-console]
+fixed-by: ADR 0153; mesh-catalog PR 183 (records), PR 185 (a phrase that wraps)
+amended-design: 03-DESIGN/01-to-be/35-reading-the-record.md
 ---
 
 # 006 — This repository is not indexed into the knowledge base, and the claim that it is holds up a decision
@@ -155,3 +155,54 @@ design document here, and get it back. That check fails today by design.
 
 **What stands until then** is the signpost, and the honest description of it: reachable, not
 surfacing.
+
+## Where this stands, 2026-09-29
+
+*Added in a grooming pass.* The knowledge base this record is about is the **predecessor's**, and it
+is no longer reachable from anything: the surface that answered `recall_search` speaks the transport
+the mesh removed at the cut-over
+([issue 147](../147-the-operators-tools-still-dial-the-bus-that-was-removed/00-report.md)).
+
+So the sentence in `README.md` that this record catches — *these documents are still indexed into
+the knowledge base* — is now wrong twice over: nothing indexed them, and there is nothing to index
+them into. The record stays open, and its answer is no longer "index this repository somewhere"; it
+is whatever the mesh grows as its own knowledge surface, if it grows one. Until then the honest fix
+is the README, which should stop claiming a property nothing provides.
+
+
+## Where this stands, 2026-09-30
+
+The README no longer claims a property nothing provides: it says the indexing never existed, that the
+store it named is unreachable since the cut-over, and that ADR 0025's answer — read, not copied, by an
+agent that consults this repository — is decided and not built. That was the honest fix the previous
+note asked for, and it is done.
+
+The record stays open on ADR 0025's build, and on nothing else. The mesh's own operator surface is now
+a module ([ADR 0152](../../02-DECISIONS/0152-the-operators-surface-is-a-module-the-console.md)); the
+reader ADR 0025 describes is the mesh session of design 15, which would answer through that surface
+like any tool. What closes this is still the check 0025 names: search for a phrase that appears only in
+a design document here, and get it back.
+
+## Built, 2026-09-30
+
+[ADR 0153](../../02-DECISIONS/0153-the-record-is-read-by-a-module-and-the-console-lists-it.md): the
+reader is a module, `records` (mesh-catalog PR 183), keeping a checkout of this repository from the
+forge and answering `records_search`, `records_read`, `records_list`, `records_status` and
+`records_sync` at the commit it read; the console lists them beside every other tool, which is where
+"beside everything else" lives in a mesh with no store. Design
+[35 — Reading the record](../../03-DESIGN/01-to-be/35-reading-the-record.md). The module's test runs
+0025's check against a repository it makes; this record closes when the same check passes through the
+console on the live mesh, and says so below.
+
+## Resolved, 2026-09-30
+
+The check ADR 0025 names passed on the live mesh: through the console on a workstation,
+`records_search` for a phrase that appears in one design document here returned that document and the
+commit it was read at, from a checkout the mesh keeps and nobody copied. What this record asked on
+2026-08-23 — *does the searcher find it without already suspecting it exists?* — is answered by where
+the tool sits: in the same list as the forge's and the mesh's own, described as the thing to search
+before forming a hypothesis. Reachable became surfacing when the surface became a list.
+
+Open beside it, and not this record's: the mesh has no symptom-indexed memory at all since the
+cut-over ([as-is 07](../../03-DESIGN/00-as-is/07-knowledge.md) says so), and the lessons of these
+days are in this repository by hand.

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

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: located
 opened: 2026-09-22
-located-in: []
+located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
 fixed-by:
 amended-design:
 ---
@@ -35,3 +35,14 @@ it changes before it changes it, and for taking a module this one does not.
   included, and ask for the same kind of confirmation as the flip?
 - Or should taking refuse while a port of the module is reachable more widely than the module
   declares, until the operator either changes the module's exposure or confirms the narrowing?
+
+## Decided, 2026-10-01
+
+[ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md), rules 1 and 2: the preview names a narrowing. Building follows,
+host first, then the controller's `take`.
+
+## Built, 2026-10-02
+
+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.

04-ISSUES/087-the-controller-cannot-tell-a-host-is-too-old/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-22
-located-in: []
-fixed-by:
+located-in: [mesh-controller internal/link/protocol.go (the report field that was missing), internal/inventory, cmd/mesh-controller (node show and status)]
+fixed-by: mesh-controller 7683ba8, corrected by 1d9c102
 amended-design:
 ---
 

04-ISSUES/087-the-controller-cannot-tell-a-host-is-too-old/01-resolution.md

@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
+# 087 — resolved: the mesh knows which host runs a machine
+
+*2026-09-30.*
+
+## The field existed and was thrown away on arrival
+
+The machine has reported its host version since
+[ADR 0141](../../02-DECISIONS/0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md) — `Host` on the report, with
+a comment saying why it must be there: *"without it nothing can say a machine is behind."*
+
+**The controller's own copy of the report did not have the field.** Two structs describe one message,
+one on each side of the wire, and only the sending side had it — so it unmarshalled into nothing and the
+mesh could not answer a question the machine had been answering for a week. That is the whole of this
+issue's mechanism, and it is worth stating plainly because neither side was wrong on its own.
+
+## What it says now
+
+`node show` names it per machine:
+
+```
+  last heard from   here
+  host              2026-09-30-0214
+```
+
+`not reported — this machine has not said since the mesh began keeping it` where the mesh has not been
+told, because a machine that has not said is a different thing from a machine running nothing.
+
+`status` names the machines that are behind another:
+
+```
+1 machine(s) run an older host than another machine does:
+  ace          2026-09-29-0113
+
+  the newest any machine reports is 2026-09-30-0214. A host refuses a declaration carrying a
+  field it does not know, whole — so a new field reaches these machines last
+```
+
+## Disagreement, not staleness, and that is deliberate
+
+The open questions asked whether the controller should refuse to send a declaration a node cannot
+parse. It cannot yet, honestly: **nothing delivers a host version** (ADR 0141 is accepted and not
+built, which is [issue 142](../142-the-host-is-the-one-thing-the-mesh-does-not-deliver/00-report.md)),
+so the mesh holds no canonical current version and "behind" has no fixed point to be behind.
+
+What it can say truthfully is that these machines do not all run the same host, and which is newest of
+the ones it has been told about. That is the fact that matters before a declaration gains a field: **the
+oldest host in the mesh is what the mesh may send.**
+
+Two deliberate refusals to guess:
+
+- **A machine that has reported nothing is not called behind.** It may be running anything. `node show`
+  says it has not said, per machine, which is the honest form.
+- **Versions compare as strings.** That suits the timestamps and commits this mesh uses and is wrong
+  for a scheme where `10` sorts before `9`. Said in the code at the place that would have to learn,
+  rather than left as a surprise.
+
+## What I shipped first was wrong, and the mesh said so within the hour
+
+The first version reported *"N machine(s) run an older host than another machine does"* and worked out
+which by comparing versions as strings. **A host reports its version as a commit, and commits have no
+order.**
+
+On the live mesh, with the adopted machine pushed for the first time:
+
+```
+3 machine(s) run an older host than another machine does:
+  g14          04a27ca
+  novox        04a27ca
+  shanks       04a27ca
+```
+
+Those three run the **newer** host — installed 09:18, against the adopted machine's 01:13. `ced54d4`
+sorts above `04a27ca` and that is all it means. An arbitrary lexicographic result, presented as a fact,
+about the one thing this record exists to make trustworthy.
+
+The code carried a caveat saying versions compare as strings and that this "is enough for the timestamps
+and commits this mesh uses". That was the error, written down and not noticed: it is enough for
+timestamps and it is **meaningless** for commits, and the mesh reports commits.
+
+It now reports the split and claims no ordering:
+
+```
+4 machine(s) do not all run the same host:
+  04a27ca      g14, novox, shanks
+  ced54d4      ace
+
+  a host refuses a declaration carrying a field it does not know, whole — so the mesh may
+  send only what every one of these understands. Which of them is newer is not readable
+  from a commit; that needs a version the host reports as ordered
+```
+
+More useful as well as more honest — the reader sees who is on which side of the split, which is what
+decides whether a field can be sent — and it leaves the ordering where it belongs: with the host, which
+would have to report something ordered for anybody to have it.
+
+**This is [issue 145](../145-a-machine-reads-healthy-while-its-modules-cannot-reach-each-other/00-report.md)
+arriving by my own door**, an hour after closing it: a report that confidently says the opposite of the
+truth is worse than one that says less, because it trains a reader to distrust the whole surface.
+
+## Measured on the mesh, and one limitation it exposed
+
+All four machines run the identical host binary — same digest, installed within eighteen seconds of each
+other — and at first only one reported its version. The other three said *not reported*, which read as a
+difference between machines where there was none.
+
+**A machine states its host version only when the mesh sends it a declaration.** The report is published
+after an apply; the periodic reconcile that runs every five minutes publishes nothing, because it is the
+machine keeping itself as declared rather than answering anything. So a machine that is current and idle
+never says, and the mesh cannot distinguish that from a machine running something ancient.
+
+Confirmed by pushing: before, `not reported`; after, `04a27ca` — the same version the machine that had
+been pushed already reported.
+
+```
+novox      host   04a27ca
+shanks     host   04a27ca
+g14        host   04a27ca
+ace        host   not reported — this machine has not said since the mesh began keeping it
+```
+
+`ace` has not been pushed since the field existed; it is adopted and parked.
+
+**This is enough for the purpose and not enough for the claim.** For deciding whether a new declaration
+field is safe it is sufficient, because pushing is what the mesh is about to do anyway and the answer
+arrives with the act. For *knowing what the mesh is running*, it is not: a long-idle machine's entry is
+as old as its last push, and the honest reading of `not reported` is "nobody has asked recently" rather
+than "this machine is silent". The words say the first, which is why they are those words.
+
+Making a heartbeat carry it would close the gap and is a change to what a heartbeat is — a bare word
+that the node is there, deliberately carrying nothing else. Left alone rather than widened in passing.
+
+## The open questions, answered as far as they can be
+
+- *Should a node report the version of its host?* It already did. The gap was the reading.
+- *Should the mesh refuse to send a field no node understands yet, or refuse per node and say so?*
+  Neither, yet — refusing needs the mesh to know which fields need which version, which is the third
+  question below and is not answered here. What it does is make the disagreement visible before
+  somebody adds a field.
+- *Is there a general shape — a declaration saying which version of the host it needs?* Still open, and
+  now cheaper to answer: the versions are recorded, so a minimum-version field on a declaration has
+  something to compare against. It belongs with
+  [issue 107](../107-a-declaration-carries-no-order/00-report.md), which wants to add a field and is the
+  first thing this makes safe.

04-ISSUES/088-the-forges-own-address-names-a-port-it-may-not-have/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-22
-located-in: []
-fixed-by:
+located-in: [mesh-catalog modules/gitea, mesh-controller internal/catalogue/declaration.go]
+fixed-by: mesh-controller 7352c84, merged in #46 — a module is told its port in a container's environment too, as a file already was
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -39,3 +39,9 @@ the assignment happens to differ.
 - Should composition refuse an environment value that names a port the module does not fix, the
   way it refuses other claims a module cannot make?
 - Which other modules write their own address, with a port, into their environment?
+
+## Closed
+
+*2026-09-29, in a grooming pass rather than by whoever fixed it.* The forge's address follows a moved port the same way every other reader does. Found by
+reading what the code repositories' commits cite: the fix names this issue and is on `main`. It was
+not re-verified on a machine, and this record says so rather than implying a run that did not happen.

04-ISSUES/089-a-contributed-route-names-a-port-the-node-may-have-moved/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-22
-located-in: []
-fixed-by:
+located-in: [mesh-controller internal/catalogue/declaration.go, mesh-catalog (every routed module)]
+fixed-by: mesh-controller bdf965d (a route names the endpoint it serves) with `portOfEndpoint` and `AtPublishedPort` — the contribution carries the endpoint's declared port and the machine-side redirection is applied to it like any other
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -45,3 +45,9 @@ precisely because the predecessor holds the usual one.
   keeping the mapping out of rendered configuration?
 - What should refuse a declaration whose contributed route names a port nothing on that node
   listens on?
+
+## Closed
+
+*2026-09-29, in a grooming pass rather than by whoever fixed it.* A route names an endpoint rather than a port, and the redirection that turns a declared port into the published one is applied to contributions too. Found by
+reading what the code repositories' commits cite: the fix names this issue and is on `main`. It was
+not re-verified on a machine, and this record says so rather than implying a run that did not happen.

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

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: located
 opened: 2026-09-22
-located-in: []
+located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
 fixed-by:
 amended-design:
 ---
@@ -48,3 +48,18 @@ network, or it is not a takeover.
   directory — so the module adopts it by the rule that already exists?
 - Should something refuse to call a module the successor of a bootstrap service it cannot adopt?
 - Is the forge's own address better resolved than set, which is [issue 088](../088-the-forges-own-address-names-a-port-it-may-not-have/00-report.md)?
+
+## Decided, 2026-10-01
+
+[ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md), rule 7: genesis raises as the module declares. Building follows,
+host first, then the controller's `take`.
+
+## Built in part, 2026-10-02
+
+mesh-host 64: genesis raises the forge under the module's container name (`gitea`), pinned to the
+module's image digest, with the module's data directory mounted at `/data` — so the module finds it,
+holds it, and a take compares equal images and the same data. A test holds the installer's constants
+to the module's manifest where the catalogue is checked out beside it. The network is the difference
+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.

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

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: located
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-22
 located-in: [mesh-catalog, mesh-controller internal/catalogue]
-fixed-by:
+fixed-by: ADR 0104 — the route adapter module (mesh-catalog modules/route-adapter) writes each migrated route into the predecessor's proxy; it runs on the home server's migration
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -71,3 +71,10 @@ answered by an **adapter** that writes into the predecessor's own configuration.
 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.
+
+## Resolved, 2026-10-01
+
+The adapter ADR 0104 decided exists and runs: `route-adapter` provides `route` on an adopted
+machine by writing each migrated module's route where the predecessor's proxy reads it, and the
+proxy itself is the last cutover. [ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md)
+records the rest of what a take compares.

04-ISSUES/096-a-setting-that-cannot-work-is-stored-and-stops-the-node/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-23
-located-in: []
-fixed-by:
+located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
+fixed-by: mesh-controller (the pull request after 201: JudgeSettings, LeftOut), mesh-host 64 (left_out kept)
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -58,3 +58,17 @@ knowing the code.
   an operator to undo it without reading the source?
 - Is there anything a node must never be pushed without, such that sending a partial declaration is
   worse than sending none?
+
+## Decided, 2026-10-01
+
+[ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md), rule 6: judged where stored; an impossible statement costs a module. Building follows,
+host first, then the controller's `take`.
+
+## Resolved, 2026-10-02
+
+One judgement, in the catalogue, run where a setting is stored and where a machine is composed. Stored,
+a setting that cannot compose with the module's current definition is refused naming the node, the
+module, the layer and the key; a key that reaches nothing is refused there too. Composed, a definition
+that moved under a stored setting leaves that module out of the machine's declaration — the envelope
+names it, the host keeps what it holds and wrote for it, `plan` and `push` say it — and the machine is
+told everything else. A stray setting no longer refuses the whole machine where it is read.

04-ISSUES/097-a-resource-that-changes-target-leaves-the-old-one-behind/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-23
-located-in: []
-fixed-by:
+located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
+fixed-by: mesh-host 63 (former targets removed, strays reported), mesh-controller 201/202 (strays shown)
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -75,3 +75,16 @@ found, and so would be kept for ever on purpose.
   module unassigned between the two declarations?
 - What reports this? Nothing on the machine currently answers "what is running here that the mesh
   did not ask for", which is the question that would have found this in seconds.
+
+## Decided, 2026-10-01
+
+[ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md), rule 5: former targets are removed and strays reported. Building follows,
+host first, then the controller's `take`.
+
+## Resolved, 2026-10-02
+
+mesh-host 63: the host's record keeps a resource's former targets, removes a container or file it
+wrote under a name the declaration no longer names, never what was found, and reports strays — what
+runs on the machine that the mesh neither wrote nor holds. mesh-controller 201 and 202 show strays
+on `node show` for an adopted and a converged machine alike; the live mesh reported four on the
+control node the evening it rolled.

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

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: located
 opened: 2026-09-23
-located-in: []
+located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
 fixed-by:
 amended-design:
 ---
@@ -63,3 +63,14 @@ written.
   substitutes settings into content today.
 - Is the kept original enough of an answer, given nothing restores it and nothing points at it
   when the service starts behaving differently?
+
+## Decided, 2026-10-01
+
+[ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md), rules 1 and 2: the difference is shown and a differing file refuses. Building follows,
+host first, then the controller's `take`.
+
+## Built, 2026-10-02
+
+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.

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

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: located
 opened: 2026-09-23
-located-in: []
+located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
 fixed-by:
 amended-design:
 ---
@@ -60,3 +60,14 @@ expected rate.
   nothing answers the first.
 - Is a digest pin the right thing for a module that takes over an existing service at all, or
   should a cutover be able to say *keep what is running* and record what that was?
+
+## Decided, 2026-10-01
+
+[ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md), rules 1 and 2: the images are compared by age and a downgrade refuses. Building follows,
+host first, then the controller's `take`.
+
+## Built, 2026-10-02
+
+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.

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

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: located
 opened: 2026-09-23
-located-in: []
+located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
 fixed-by:
 amended-design:
 ---
@@ -65,3 +65,16 @@ the module can only be installed fresh.
   Should it, so the dangerous case can be refused rather than discovered?
 - What is the reverse path: the mesh has minted one, the service ignored it, and the working value
   is still on the machine. Nothing reconciles those.
+
+## Decided, 2026-10-01
+
+[ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md), rules 2 and 3: a minted secret for found data refuses; secret accept reaches required secrets. Building follows,
+host first, then the controller's `take`.
+
+## Built, 2026-10-02
+
+`secret accept <node> <module> <name> --provider <node>` reaches a required secret (mesh-controller 201).
+The pull request after it reads every secret a module holds on a machine with its origin, and a take
+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.

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

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: located
 opened: 2026-09-23
-located-in: []
+located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/adoption.go (take previews nothing), mesh-host internal/apply (the comparison and the record)]
 fixed-by:
 amended-design:
 ---
@@ -61,3 +61,15 @@ exercise.
   learn to take a group atomically? Nothing takes more than one module at a time today.
 - Does the same hole exist for anything else the predecessor's runtime resolves and the mesh's does
   not — a network alias, a `depends_on`, a name in a shared `/etc/hosts`?
+
+## Decided, 2026-10-01
+
+[ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md), rules 1 and 4: the neighbours are named; a found network may be kept by a setting. Building follows,
+host first, then the controller's `take`.
+
+## Built, 2026-10-02
+
+The preview names every neighbour on a found network (mesh-controller 201). The pull request after it
+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.

04-ISSUES/105-the-hub-of-the-private-network-is-not-a-seat/00-report.md

@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-23
-located-in: []
-fixed-by:
-amended-design:
+located-in: [mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/network.go (the placing command), internal/inventory/migrations/0004-the-overlay.sql (one hub)]
+fixed-by: nothing to build — ADR 0161 rule 2; the second hub was already refused by name, and the private network's seat waits for ADR 0121's server and client modules
+amended-design: [03-DESIGN/01-to-be/26-the-seats.md]
 ---
 
 # 105 — The hub of the private network is a placement, not a seat
@@ -32,3 +32,16 @@ a node-scoped seat held by every node, which is true and not what was asked.
 - Does the per-node seat still say anything once the hub is a seat, or is it the interface's
   presence restated?
 - What else in the mesh is "exactly one" and recorded as a placement rather than a seat?
+
+## Resolved, 2026-10-01
+
+Read against the code: the store has kept one hub since the overlay's first migration (a unique
+index), and `overlay place <node> --hub` refuses a second naming the first. What this report saw as
+silent is not. [ADR 0161](../../02-DECISIONS/0161-what-deserves-a-seat.md), rule 2, answers the
+question that remained: a singular fact about machines is a placement with a capacity of one,
+refused by name and named in the listing — never a seat, because a seat is held by a module
+assignment and the private network is the host's own until
+[ADR 0121](../../02-DECISIONS/0121-a-system-seat-is-named-for-its-scope-and-modules-define-their-own.md)'s
+server and client modules exist. That seat stands, deferred with the split it needs.
+
+*How it is checked:* the overlay command's test for a second hub, and the index.

04-ISSUES/106-the-vault-claims-no-seat/00-report.md

@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
 ---
-status: open
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-23
-located-in: []
-fixed-by:
-amended-design:
+located-in: [mesh-controller internal/catalogue/seats.go (the seed lacks mesh-vault), mesh-catalog modules/mesh-vault/module.json (claims nothing)]
+fixed-by: mesh-controller PR 192 (the seat row), mesh-catalog PR 205 (the claim; the vault's events renamed to its own)
+amended-design: [03-DESIGN/01-to-be/26-the-seats.md]
 ---
 
 # 106 — The vault claims no seat, so nothing refuses a second one
@@ -31,3 +31,19 @@ others were missed the same way — every provider added after 0079.
 - A mesh-scoped seat `mesh-vault`, by the 0079 convention — is there any reason not to?
 - Should a provider of a mesh-scoped provision be required to claim a seat, or say explicitly that
   more than one is allowed, so the omission cannot recur?
+
+## Decided, 2026-10-01
+
+[ADR 0161](../../02-DECISIONS/0161-what-deserves-a-seat.md), rule 1: `mesh-vault` joins the mesh's
+own set, mesh-scoped, delivering `secret`, and the vault claims it; a second provider is a second
+claimant, refused by name. The record also answers the second question: a provision the mesh's own
+code dereferences by name gets a seat, every other mesh-scoped provision may have several providers.
+Design 26's *reserved* for `secret` named an effect no rule produced; corrected there.
+
+## Resolved, 2026-10-01
+
+`seats` on the live mesh lists `mesh-vault` at mesh scope, delivering `secret`, held by the vault on
+the control node. A second provider of `secret` is now a second claimant and refused by name
+(`CanHold`'s test). Found on the way: the vault's definition could not be rebuilt at all — it emitted
+`secret.provisioned` and the like, which the builder reads as another module's events — so the events
+are now the vault's own, `provisioned`, `rotated`, `deprovisioned`.

04-ISSUES/107-a-declaration-carries-no-order/00-report.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 ---
-status: located
+status: resolved
 opened: 2026-09-23
 located-in: [mesh-controller internal/link, mesh-host internal/link]
-fixed-by:
+fixed-by: mesh-host PR 59 (the host refuses an older sequence and drains by it), mesh-controller PR 160 (each send is numbered under the node's hold) — measured 2026-09-30, 02-resolution.md
 amended-design:
 ---
 
@@ -40,3 +40,16 @@ exists there and is thrown away at the wire.
   separate genesis-digest branch is needed on the host?
 - Is a sequence enough, or does a mode change deserve its own marker, so a replayed converged
   declaration is refused by mode as well as by order?
+
+## What has since made this safer to do (2026-09-30)
+
+Adding a `sequence` to a declaration is adding a field, and a host refuses a declaration carrying a
+field it does not know — whole. That was
+[issue 087](../087-the-controller-cannot-tell-a-host-is-too-old/00-report.md), and it is resolved: the
+mesh now records which host each machine reports and `status` names every machine running an older one
+than another does.
+
+So the flag day is visible before it is walked into, which it was not when this was filed. It does not
+make the field free: **the oldest host in the mesh is still what the mesh may send**, and one machine of
+four is behind today. A sequence that an old host refuses takes that machine out of the mesh's reach
+entirely — worse than the replay it prevents, which has never been observed.

04-ISSUES/107-a-declaration-carries-no-order/01-diagnosis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+# 107 — diagnosis: the fix is a flag day, and it should wait for delivery
+
+*2026-09-30. Read, measured, and not built — deliberately.*
+
+## The premise is confirmed
+
+A host parses a declaration with unknown fields refused, and the code says why rather than leaving it
+to be inferred:
+
+> `DisallowUnknownFields` is the whole point rather than strictness for its own sake: a field the host
+> does not know is a thing the control plane believes it asked for.
+
+So adding `sequence` and `supersedes` is not an additive change. **Any host that has not been upgraded
+refuses the whole declaration and applies nothing** — which is exactly the behaviour that keeps a
+half-understood declaration off a machine, and exactly what makes this expensive.
+
+## What has changed since this was filed
+
+[Issue 087](../087-the-controller-cannot-tell-a-host-is-too-old/00-report.md) is resolved: the mesh now
+records the host version each machine reports and `status` names every machine running an older host
+than another does. The flag day is visible before it is walked into, which it was not on 2026-09-23.
+
+That makes the cost measurable rather than hypothetical, and the measurement is the reason this is not
+being built today.
+
+## Why it waits
+
+**One machine of four runs an older host, and it cannot be upgraded.** `ace` is adopted, deliberately
+parked until the network and module-assignment work is settled, and **nothing delivers a host version at
+all** — [ADR 0141](../../02-DECISIONS/0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md) is accepted and not
+built, which is [issue 142](../142-the-host-is-the-one-thing-the-mesh-does-not-deliver/00-report.md).
+Every machine takes a hand-placed binary.
+
+So shipping the field means, in order: place a host by hand on three machines, unpark the fourth, place
+it there too, and only then turn the controller half on. A machine missed in that sequence is a machine
+the mesh cannot send anything to at all — not degraded, unreachable.
+
+**And the fault it prevents has never been observed.** The record says so itself: *"Not observed;
+constructed from the code, and narrow."* It needs a backlog of more than sixteen declarations queued
+across a `converge`/`adopt` pair, or a broker slow enough to split one, and the host already applies the
+newest of a drained batch and refuses a declaration that is not the last by digest.
+
+**Trading a machine's reachability for a replay nobody has seen is the wrong way round.** The right
+order is [issue 142](../142-the-host-is-the-one-thing-the-mesh-does-not-deliver/00-report.md) first —
+when the mesh can deliver a host, a declaration field costs a rollout instead of an expedition — and the
+work order already puts that in its last group, as the proof that the mesh can make another of itself.
+
+## What the open questions look like now
+
+- *A per-node `sequence` under the controller's node hold, and `supersedes` as the previous digest?*
+  Still the right shape. The controller already holds the lock and already records each send, so the
+  order exists and is thrown away at the wire — unchanged since this was filed.
+- *Genesis signing its bundle as sequence zero?* Yes, and it is the cheaper half: the bundle is written
+  by the host that will read it, so it has no flag day of its own.
+- *Is a sequence enough, or does a mode change deserve its own marker?* A sequence alone does not stop
+  a replayed *converged* declaration reaching a node that has since been returned to adopted, which is
+  the incident of issue 104 by another door and is what this record names as its real risk. It wants
+  both, and the second is the one worth having first.
+- **And one this record did not ask:** should a declaration say which host version it needs? 087 makes
+  that comparable for the first time, and it is the general form of the answer — a field that announces
+  its own requirement, rather than a flag day per field, for ever.
+
+## Status
+
+Left `located`. The owner is unchanged, the shape of the fix is agreed, and the gate is
+[issue 142](../142-the-host-is-the-one-thing-the-mesh-does-not-deliver/00-report.md) rather than anything
+in this record. **This is a judgement about order, not a refusal** — it is cheap to overrule, and the
+code is a day's work once a host can be delivered.
+
+## The gate has opened (2026-09-30, evening)
+
+The mesh delivers the host now — built by its own toolchain, published to its own registry, delivered
+over the bus and started by the launcher, on all four machines
+([issue 142](../142-the-host-is-the-one-thing-the-mesh-does-not-deliver/01-progress.md)). A declaration
+field is a build and a push, not an expedition. The order this record asked for — hosts first, then
+the controller — is now two commands and a status line that says when the first has finished.