Issue 163 (was 161): another record took 161 on main first

ADR 0110 decided each assignment records where its requirements are answered
from; the control plane keeps only a per-machine pin (none recorded) and
resolves every requirement implicitly. Harmless with one provider; a second
one silently moves consumers' data.

04-ISSUES/163-a-delivered-host-stood-aside-on-every-push-and-reported-nothing/00-report.md

@@ -1,56 +0,0 @@
----
-status: resolved
-opened: 2026-09-30
-located-in: [mesh-host cmd/mesh-host/main.go (the successor check after an apply)]
-fixed-by: mesh-host PR 58 — the check asks with the running version, read from the binary's path, not the link-time stamp
-amended-design:
----
-
-# 163 — A delivered host stood aside on every push, and reported nothing
-
-## What was observed
-
-*2026-09-30, rolling the mesh-built host onto the last two machines.*
-
-Every push to a machine running a delivered host produced, in order:
-
-```
-host 093231796eb0 is delivered; standing aside so the launcher runs it
-applied 333 resource(s)
-applied, and could not tell the mesh: reporting: context canceled
-nox-mesh-host-launch: the host exited cleanly; starting it again
-nox-mesh-host-launch: running /usr/lib/nox-mesh-host/versions/093231796eb0/nox-mesh-host
-```
-
-— for the version it was **already running**. It restarted itself on every push, for ever, and the mesh
-never received a single report from it: `node show` kept the version from before the crossover, and
-the operator's push waited its full three minutes for an answer that was never coming.
-
-Read as healthy throughout: unit active, bus link up, "hearing what this node should be".
-
-## Why
-
-After an apply the host asks whether a newer host has been delivered than the one running, and the
-question was asked with the **link-time version stamp**. Since
-[issue 161](../161-a-delivered-host-carries-none-of-its-link-time-facts/01-resolution.md) a delivered
-host's version comes from where it sits and its stamp is `development build` — so the comparison never
-matched the newest delivered version, and "a newer host is waiting" was always true.
-
-Standing aside cancels the context the report is published with, so the report was lost on every one
-of those applies. Two faults from one wrong argument.
-
-The change that moved the version to the path was applied to the report and to the known-good record,
-and not here. Half a change, and the half left behind was the one that decides whether to exit.
-
-## Why the three-minute wait made it invisible
-
-The push's `--wait` timing out read as *slow*. It was not slow: **the report was never going to arrive.**
-The operator put it exactly: *if you don't get a response in five seconds, something is wrong.* A wait
-long enough to absorb a machine's whole apply is a wait long enough to hide that the machine never
-answered.
-
-## How it is checked
-
-A machine running a delivered host is pushed a declaration that delivers nothing new; it applies,
-reports, and does not stand aside. A machine running a delivered host is pushed a genuinely newer
-version; it stands aside once, and the next push it does not.

04-ISSUES/163-an-assignment-does-not-record-which-provider-answers-it/00-report.md

@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+---
+status: open
+opened: 2026-09-30
+located-in:
+  - mesh-controller cmd/mesh-controller/modules.go (assign takes no provider; pin is a separate, per-machine command)
+  - mesh-controller internal/inventory (provision_pin keyed by (node, name))
+fixed-by:
+amended-design:
+---
+
+# 163 — An assignment does not record which provider answers it
+
+## What was observed
+
+Planning ace's modules that need a database (baserow, letta, n8n, and the apps using ace's
+predecessor postgres). The operator's model — and ADR 0110's — is that **an assignment states where
+each of its requirements is answered from**: gitea's assignment on novox says its `postgres-database`
+comes from novox; an app assigned to ace says whether its database comes from ace or from novox.
+
+The mesh holds no such statement for any assignment. Read on novox (2026-09-30):
+
+```
+select … from provision_pin;   -- 0 rows
+```
+
+Every requirement in the mesh resolves implicitly, each time, by ADR 0084's order (a pin, then the
+provider on the consumer's own node, then the only provider).
+
+## What was decided, and what exists
+
+[ADR 0110](../../02-DECISIONS/0110-a-seat-is-a-module-assignment-from-a-closed-set.md):
+
+> Where several remain and none is local, **a person chooses when the module is assigned**.
+> Assignment lists the candidates, with the holder of a seat that delivers the provision suggested
+> first, and records the answer on the assignment as its pin. Without an answer the module is not
+> assigned.
+
+What the control plane implements:
+
+| decided | implemented |
+|---|---|
+| the answer is recorded **on the assignment** | `provision_pin` is keyed `(node, name)` — one answer per machine per provision, shared by every module on it |
+| chosen **at assignment** | `assign <node> <module>` takes no provider; `pin <node> <provision> <from-node>` is a separate command |
+| an assignment may be answered from its own machine (gitea ← novox) | `pin` refuses a machine pinning to itself ("does not need saying") |
+| every assignment has an answer | none recorded; resolution guesses the same answer every time |
+
+## Consequence
+
+Nothing is wrong *today* — with one postgres provider, every guess is the intended answer. But the
+answer is not a fact anyone stated, so:
+
+- **it changes silently** the day a second provider appears (e.g. a postgres assigned on ace): every
+  unpinned consumer re-resolves — a consumer on ace moves from novox's database to an empty one on ace
+  at the next push, which is data a module stops seeing without anything saying so;
+- two modules on one machine cannot take one provision from different providers;
+- a person reading an assignment cannot see where its data lives.
+
+## What would be right
+
+ADR 0110 as written: `assign` records, per requirement, the node that answers it (its own node
+included), offering the candidates and refusing an assignment without an answer where several exist;
+the per-machine `provision_pin` becomes a per-assignment record, with existing assignments backfilled
+from what they resolve to now so nothing moves.

04-ISSUES/169-a-machine-shares-its-files-and-the-mesh-does-not-know/00-report.md

@@ -1,128 +0,0 @@
----
-status: open
-opened: 2026-09-30
-located-in:
-  - mesh-catalog (no module shares a path over the network)
-  - hq 02-DECISIONS (a file-share seat, per ADR 0126, is a module's own to define)
-fixed-by:
-amended-design:
----
-
-# 169 — A machine shares its files, and the mesh does not know
-
-## What was observed
-
-ace serves the operator's media library to the home network with two host services no module
-declares and HAL never managed either:
-
-```
-/etc/exports:   /storage/media  192.168.1.0/24(rw,sync,root_squash,…)     nfs-server active, :2049
-/etc/samba/smb.conf: [media] path = /storage/media/  valid users = media   smb active, :139/:445
-```
-
-Two LAN clients were connected at survey (2026-09-30). The library itself is operator data
-(ADR 0051: ~40 TB on ZFS, the mesh owns nothing about it — [issue 153](../153-an-adopted-machines-data-cannot-be-placed-where-it-is/00-report.md)
-is about modules reaching it in place).
-
-Under the mesh as it stands, this arrangement has no expression and one failure mode:
-
-- **Nothing declares the listens.** At `converge ace` the filter is the sum of what modules listen
-  on (ADR 0045); 2049 and 445 are nobody's, so the shares close — silently, for the two clients
-  that mount them.
-- **Nothing owns the configuration.** `/etc/exports` and `smb.conf` are hand-written files on one
-  machine; a second machine sharing a directory would be written by hand again.
-- **Nothing can consume it.** A module on another node that wanted the library (a player, an
-  indexer, a backup) has no `requires` to state and no binding to read; it would mount by a
-  hand-typed host and path.
-- The clients are LAN devices, so this also meets [issue 154](../154-a-machines-own-network-is-not-a-reach/00-report.md)
-  (no reach for the machine's own network).
-
-## The proposal (the operator's, 2026-09-30, settled after two rounds)
-
-**Two module-defined seats, one per protocol, because NFS and SMB share an intent and not a
-contract.** A seat in the mesh's sense is a contract — what it accepts, emits and serves, and the
-tools its holder must answer (ADR 0126, 0132) — and lined up, the two share almost none of it:
-
-| | `nfs-share` | `smb-share` |
-|---|---|---|
-| serves | export path(s); the client ranges allowed (`sec=sys` authorises by address) | share name(s), path |
-| pair credential | none | a user and password per consumer |
-| consumer's mount | `at:/path` | `//at/share` with credentials |
-| holder's tools | export / unexport a path for a range | add / remove a share, create a user |
-
-One `file-share` seat would be the union with every field optional — a consumer could bind it and
-still not know how to mount what it got (the emptiness ADR 0129 warns against). "Export a path to
-the network" is a category, and the mesh needs no seat category: a consumer requires the one it
-can mount. If "give me the library, however" is ever needed, it is a provision an umbrella module
-serves, not a seat.
-
-Both are node-scoped, one holder per node (ADR 0110), so ace holds both. `nfs` and `samba` are the
-first implementations; a second (Ganesha for `nfs-share`, ksmbd for `smb-share`) is what proves
-0126's promise that "replacing the implementation changes nothing for any caller".
-
-The holder module:
-
-- declares the exported paths as `accesses` (ADR 0051: it owns nothing about them — never creates,
-  chowns or removes), and *which* paths as the assignment's settings (ADR 0046/0112);
-- writes the share configuration (`/etc/exports`, `smb.conf`) as mesh-managed files and drives the
-  units, like `dnsmasq`/`sshd` do for theirs;
-- declares its endpoints (`nfs` 2049/tcp; `smb` 445/tcp, …) so the reach — internal, or the LAN
-  once 154 has an answer — is the assignment's, and converge keeps them open;
-- **provides** the seat's provision, so a consumer on another node `requires nfs-share` (or
-  `smb-share`) and reads `${bound:nfs-share:at}` and the path from its binding instead of a
-  hand-typed mount.
-
-## The design gap this exposes
-
-**A seat definition has no home outside the module that first declared it.** Today a seat is
-declared inside a manifest (`showcase` declares `the-showcase`, `ca-trust` its own). If `nfs`
-declared `nfs-share`, Ganesha could hold it only by depending on nfs's manifest — the coupling
-0126 removed for callers, reintroduced for implementations. The protocol needs a neutral place in
-the catalogue beside the modules (a seat definition registered like a manifest), with a module
-saying which seats it implements. This is the first role with an obvious second implementation,
-which is what makes it the exemplar for that mechanism.
-
-## The consumer's half: a module mounts it (2026-09-30, third and fourth round)
-
-A binding tells a consumer *where* the share is; it does not put the files on its machine. Mounting
-is something done on a machine, and something done on a machine is a module's work — not the host's
-(the vocabulary stays closed; no `mount` resource kind).
-
-**A consumer-side module, `network-share` — the module responsible for setting up the network
-shares a node uses** (the operator's framing). A node role, like `node-uplink` or
-`node-dns-resolver`: each machine has it at most once, which is a reason for it to hold a
-node-scoped seat, so two modules can never both be writing mount units on one machine. Assigned on
-the node that wants the files:
-
-- `requires nfs-share` (or `smb-share`); several shares on one node are several local names of
-  the requirement (ADR 0094);
-- its manifest is a `package` (nfs-utils), a `file` writing a systemd `.mount` unit filled from
-  the binding — `What=${bound:nfs-share:at}:${bound:nfs-share:path}` — and a `service` enabling it
-  after the overlay is up: the same shape as `resolv-conf` or `sshd`, files and a unit;
-- *where* it mounts is the assignment's setting (`/srv/media` on one machine, elsewhere on
-  another); which machine mounts what is an operator decision made at assignment, exactly as which
-  paths a machine shares is.
-
-**The modules that use the files never learn about NFS.** A player, an indexer, a backup declares
-the mounted path as an `access` — an operator-chosen, pre-existing path the mesh never owns
-(ADR 0051), exactly as `/storage/media` is on ace. The same app manifest then runs on ace against
-the local library and on another node against the mounted one, with only its assignment differing.
-
-**The one check to add, because it is the data-loss case.** An `access` is confirmed today by the
-path being present. For a mountpoint that is not enough: a writer whose container starts before the
-mount is up writes into the empty directory underneath it, and the files vanish when the mount
-lands. The access check must confirm the path is *a mountpoint* when the module says so (or the
-module's unit is ordered before the consumer's container — which crosses modules and is exactly
-what the mesh does not order). Which of the two is the decision's.
-
-**Identity crosses the wire.** `sec=sys` NFS trusts the client's uid, so a consumer must run as the
-library's owner on the server (ace: `media`, 1001:2000) — hq 153's `${access:<id>:uid}`, read from
-the mounted tree, answers it on the consumer's side too.
-
-## Open questions for the decision
-
-- Whether an NFS export over the overlay is an `internal` reach of the same endpoint or a second
-  export line — NFS authorises by client address, so the mesh range and the LAN range are two
-  entries in one file.
-- How a consumer's binding expresses a *path* to mount (today bindings carry `at`, `port`, `as` and
-  whatever the provider `serves`), and whether one share can serve several paths.