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

@@ -139,7 +139,9 @@ written this way until the bed runs.
 > 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).
-> It ran on **one** machine; three others still trust nothing of the mesh's.
+> 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
 

04-ISSUES/129-nothing-makes-a-machine-trust-the-meshs-authority/02-resolution.md

@@ -73,11 +73,29 @@ in the module says this; it is the host's removal order that makes the module's
 
 ## What this leaves
 
-- **One machine, not four.** `novox`, `g14` and `ace` still trust nothing of the mesh's. The report's
+- **Three machines of four** *(extended the same day, after the first was proven)*. `ca-trust` is now
-  reasoning — that being on the private network is what makes a machine one that speaks to the mesh's
+  assigned to every converged machine, and each verifies with a plain client:
-  names — argues for all of them, and ADR 0147 is written for a module assigned per machine rather than
+
-  a fact carried to every machine on the network. Whether it should instead arrive the way the roster
+  ```
-  and the registry trust do is a real question and is not this record's to answer.
+  novox    mesh CA in trust store: 1    https://git.<node>.internal/ -> 200
+  g14      mesh CA in trust store: 1    https://git.<node>.internal/ -> 200
+  shanks   mesh CA in trust store: 1    https://git.<node>.internal/ -> 200
+  ```
+
+  Before, each of the two that had not been assigned it answered
+  `curl: (60) … unable to get local issuer certificate (20)` and held no entry for the mesh.
+
+  **`ace` is deliberately not among them.** It is the adopted machine, still carrying the
+  predecessor's resolver and filter, and it is not converged until the network and module-assignment
+  work is settled. Assigning a module to it would hold rather than run
+  ([ADR 0100](../../02-DECISIONS/0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md)), which is
+  correct and is not the same as trusting anything.
+
+- **It arrives per assignment, which is a shape worth questioning.** The report's reasoning — that
+  being on the private network is what makes a machine one that speaks to the mesh's names — argues
+  for a fact carried to every machine on the network, the way the roster and the registry trust are.
+  ADR 0147 chose a module assigned per machine, and this record does not reopen it; the cost is that
+  a machine joining the mesh trusts nothing until somebody remembers a second command.
 - **`service-manager` reports `degraded` on this machine** and the module ran anyway. Worth knowing that
   the capability gate passes on a degraded service manager, since a module whose whole delivery is a
   unit is the kind that would be worst served by one.