jschoubben
98eb3aa76f
Another session's 0169 landed first. The collision check from issue 155 covered issue folders only; it covers decision records now, and would have refused this.
1.9 KiB
status, opened, located-in, fixed-by, amended-design
| status | opened | located-in | fixed-by | amended-design | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| resolved | 2026-10-02 |
|
mesh-tools 27 — node-scoped seats are listed with their scope, the verb requires the machine, and the call carries it in the subject |
199 — A node-scoped seat's verb could not be called through the console
What was observed
2026-10-02, the first time a node-scoped seat declared verbs
(ADR 0170). The packet filter's
holder on every machine served rules, reload and remove on the seat's per-machine subjects, and
the bus admitted them. The console answered every call with nothing serves
node-packet-filter.rules@.
Design 33 §4 says a node-scoped seat's
tool carries the node it is asked of, as <seat>.<verb>@<node>. The console's listing left
node-scoped seats out — the comment said they wait for a caller naming the node — but the roles map
the console resolves a name against is built from that same listing. So the name never resolved as a
seat's verb, fell through to a module's subject nobody served, and the refusal named the wrong cause.
Why it matters beyond this instance
A stated behaviour that did not happen, with a refusal that pointed elsewhere: the seat's verbs were live on four machines and unreachable from the one surface a person uses. It could only be found by a node-scoped seat declaring verbs, which none had.
Resolved, 2026-10-02
mesh-tools 27: node-scoped seats are listed with their scope, their verbs take a required node, the
call carries it in the subject, and a call without one is refused in words. Tested with a round trip
asking one machine's holder and being refused without a machine.