jschoubben
004057d85c
I have been treating "what a node presents to prove it is that node" as an undecided design question for weeks, and blocking on it. It was decided. 08-connectivity says of the overlay keys: each node generates its own keypair, the private key never leaves the machine, the public key is published to the mesh -- and says explicitly that this IS ADR 0004's "a node holds its own identity", applied. Nobody had applied it to the thing 0004 is actually about. What caused it was a word. The lifecycle said a joining node receives its own durable identity, which reads as the mesh issuing something, and then the question is what. The mesh issues nothing. A node arrives holding its identity; what it receives is being known. That line now says what happens: it presents the one-time secret and its own public key, which the mesh records. The rule above it then holds literally rather than aspirationally. The mesh stores a public key, so a copy of the mesh's database grants nothing, and compromise of a node really is compromise of only that node. Also recorded, since it was asked directly: same principle as SSH, own key, not the machine's SSH host key. Host keys are regenerated by reinstalls and image clones, which would silently un-enrol a node; their lifecycle belongs to sshd rather than the mesh; and a partial host has no SSH daemon at all, so an identity scheme resting on one excludes a supported kind of node. The good half of that idea is kept: the mesh knows every node, so it can distribute host keys the way it distributes authorised keys, and node-to-node SSH stops depending on trust-on-first-use.
03-DESIGN / 01-to-be
The mesh being built toward. Every statement here traces to a record in
02-DECISIONS/; nothing arrives by drafting.
A document here describes an intention. What currently runs is in
00-as-is/, and the two are never merged — when something ships, the as-is
document is written and this one's status becomes implemented.
| Document | Covers | Rests on |
|---|---|---|
00-work-breakdown.md |
How the decomposition gets built, in what order, and where a human must look | ADR 0001 |
01-end-to-end-testing.md |
The lab: a real mesh a change can be run against before it reaches nodes | ADR 0016, 0029 |
02-scenario-declaration.md |
What a scenario declares — the underlay, and what to place on it | ADR 0016 |
03-scenario-lifecycle.md |
What happens to a scenario — raise, snapshot, restore, move, destroy | ADR 0016 |
04-lab-installation.md |
Getting the lab onto a clean machine, and why it verifies capability rather than installation | ADR 0010 |
05-the-node-host.md |
Tier 0 — the one thing installed by hand, and the only thing that changes a machine | ADR 0005 |
06-the-control-plane.md |
Tier 2 — what the term means, and the test for what belongs in it | ADR 0005 |
07-the-substrate.md |
Tier 1 — what the control plane consumes and cannot grant itself | ADR 0004, 0048 |
08-connectivity.md |
One context in full — overlay, resolution, exposure, filtering, certificates | ADR 0007, 0050, 0051, 0055 |
09-the-node-lifecycle.md |
How a machine becomes a node, stays one, and stops being one | ADR 0004, 0051 |
10-delivery.md |
Modules, the three edges, and how a change becomes a running thing | ADR 0010, 0064, 0065 |
Not yet written
- The remaining six contexts.
ADR 0006
settles the list at seven;
connectivityis the first written in full (08) and the other six do not exist yet. The work breakdown says in what order they are needed. Domain grouping outside the core.Not needed. ADR 0009 is superseded by ADR 0009: there is no domain module to group into, so there is no domain list to settle. Relationships are edges, and grouping is a tag and a query.