2026-09-23 23:13:49 +00:00
1 changed files with 53 additions and 0 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+---
+status: open
+opened: 2026-09-24
+located-in: []
+fixed-by:
+amended-design:
+---
+
+# 110 — On a converged node, a container on the runtime's own network cannot reach the resolver
+
+## What was observed
+
+Reviewing the resolver's conversion from the predecessor's, 2026-09-24, before it is assigned
+anywhere.
+
+The resolver answers on the private network's interface and on loopback, and it declares that it
+listens **from the mesh** — so the filter a converged node loads admits queries whose source is a
+private-network address. A container asks in one of two ways:
+
+- on a network the module declared, the runtime answers from the container's own namespace and
+  forwards to the resolver **from the machine itself**, which the filter admits;
+- on the runtime's **default** network, the container is handed the resolver's address directly and
+  asks from its own address on that network — which is not a private-network address, and the filter
+  drops it.
+
+So on a converged node a container on the default network has no DNS. It is not hypothetical: the
+forge's container on this machine is on the default network, and the service beside it is not —
+which is exactly why one survived the hub's address change and the other did not
+([issue 109](../109-a-container-keeps-the-address-it-was-made-with/00-report.md)).
+
+Nothing fails today, because the node is adopted and the predecessor's firewall is still in force.
+It fails at the flip.
+
+## Why it matters beyond this instance
+
+Two of the mesh's answers depend on this working. The resolver exists so that a machine and its
+containers resolve the mesh's names; and [issue 109](../109-a-container-keeps-the-address-it-was-made-with/00-report.md)
+asks whether a container should be given no address at all and always ask the resolver. That answer
+is only available if every container can reach it.
+
+It also means the flip is not as previewed. Converging lists the ports it will close; it does not
+say "and the containers on the runtime's default network will stop resolving names", because nothing
+knows that is what the rule means.
+
+## Open questions
+
+- Should the resolver's `listens` say it is reachable from the container runtime's own networks —
+  the same exception the mesh's guard already makes for them, by the interface a packet arrives on
+  rather than by its source address?
+- Or should every module be required to declare a network, so no container of the mesh's is ever on
+  the runtime's default one? That is a stronger rule and would have prevented 109 as well.
+- What checks it? A converged bed with a container on the default network resolving a mesh name is
+  the missing assertion; nothing in the resolver's own beds covers the filter.