Compare commits

...
2 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
jschoubben 2344bfb69b ADR 0191: domains are a node's — one internal, one or more public; the roster is the machines 2026-10-03 16:10:38 +02:00
jschoubben ca8a865e73 ADR 0191: the mesh's names are known by where they were composed, not by their suffix
A progressive insight: the rule and its check were stated as a suffix test; the mesh composes both
names of a route and publishes its internal one. The decision is unchanged.
2026-10-03 15:39:07 +02:00
2 changed files with 18 additions and 10 deletions
@@ -11,6 +11,16 @@ supersedes-in-part:
# 191. The mesh's resolver holds only the mesh's own names; a public name resolves publicly
> **Progressive insight — 2026-10-03.** The first implementation told the mesh's names from public
> ones by their spelling — a name ending in the mesh suffix — and this record said so: the Decision
> read *"only names under its own suffix"*, and the roster check *"every name the roster carries ends
> in the mesh suffix"*. The mesh needs no such test, nor any per-route name: domains are a node's. A
> node has **one internal domain**, `<node>.internal`, and every route on it is a name under that domain
> (ADR 0151), answered by one wildcard per node; a node has **one or more public domains**, which public
> DNS answers. So the mesh's resolver holds the nodes' internal domains and nothing else, and the roster
> carries the machines and no routed name. Both sentences now say that; what was decided — a public
> name is never given a private answer — is unchanged.
## Context
**[ADR 0066](0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md) published every routed name into internal
@@ -63,7 +73,8 @@ every public name the mesh serves, is forwarded and resolves publicly. Chosen.
## Decision
**The mesh publishes into internal resolution only names under its own suffix.** A machine's name,
**The mesh's resolver holds each node's internal domain and nothing else** — `<node>.internal` and
everything under it, at that node's private address. A machine's name,
and through it every `<label>.<node>.internal`, resolve to that machine's private address. **A public
name is never given a private answer by the mesh**: it resolves through public DNS to the public
address, from members and non-members alike.
@@ -93,8 +104,8 @@ reachability — the lab — certifies its internal names and has no public name
**How each is checked:**
- **The roster:** the controller's catalogue tests assert that every name the roster carries ends in
the mesh suffix — a routed public name in it fails the build.
- **The roster:** the controller's tests assert that the roster names the machines and nothing
else — a routed name in it, public or internal, fails the build.
- **On a machine:** asking the machine's resolver for a public name the mesh serves returns the
public address, and asking it for that route's internal name returns the private one. Asked from a
non-member on a LAN the resolver answers, the first must hold as well.
+4 -7
View File
@@ -425,15 +425,15 @@ the cost of not seeing it is inventing a mechanism that already exists.
### The mesh resolves only its own names; a public name resolves publicly
**The mesh's resolver holds names under the mesh suffix and nothing else** — every machine, and through
it every route's internal name `<label>.<node>.internal`
**The mesh's resolver holds each node's internal domain and nothing else** — `<node>.internal` and
everything under it, so every route's internal name `<label>.<node>.internal` with no line of its own
([ADR 0151](../../02-DECISIONS/0151-a-routes-internal-name-is-composed-under-the-node-that-serves-it.md)).
**A public name the mesh serves is never given a private answer**: it is forwarded and resolves to the
**A node's public domains — one or more — are never given a private answer**: it is forwarded and resolves to the
public address, from a member and from anything else the resolver answers — a resolver may serve a
machine's LAN, and a phone on that LAN must get the address it can reach
([ADR 0191](../../02-DECISIONS/0191-the-meshs-resolver-holds-only-the-meshs-own-names.md)). Inside the
mesh, a routed service is reached, and certified by the internal authority, under its internal name.
*Checked by the controller's catalogue tests — every name the roster carries ends in the mesh suffix —
*Checked by the controller's tests — the roster names the machines and no routed name —
and on a machine by asking its resolver for a public name the mesh serves: the answer is the public
address.*
@@ -1009,9 +1009,6 @@ The list is worth having in one place, because it is most of the argument:
operator's to move between meshes, but the manifest layer still stores it as a literal — so today
the composition is a per-node override rather than the design. The interpolation that would let a
module carry a label and a node carry the domain, and the mesh join them, does not yet exist.
- **Withdrawing public names from internal resolution.** The roster still publishes every routed
public name at its serving node's private address, which ADR 0191 forbids; until the controller
stops, a resolver that answers a LAN hands that LAN's non-members addresses they cannot reach.
## The hub adopts the predecessor's tunnel