jschoubben
702efca6bb
HQ held only the to-be. Every reader had to already know the system the decisions were about, and an as-is claim had nowhere to live except inside an intention. Adds 02-DESIGN/00-as-is — eleven documents written from the implementation and the operational record, not from intent, including the parts nobody would choose again. The two existing designs move under 01-to-be. Layers are declared in frontmatter and never mix: a design that ships does not move, its as-is counterpart is written, and both stand. Back-fills adr/0001-0014 for decisions taken in implementation and never recorded — the broker, the module abstraction, the mesh database, managed files, provisioning, migrations, the workspace removal, failing loudly, the constitution, application placement, linking, the employee model, the artifact, the three silos. Each marked reconstructed, dated from the history, and citing the evidence it was recovered from. The two existing records renumber to 0015 and 0016 so the ledger runs oldest first; 0017 extends 0015 to modules outside the core, principle only — the domain list is deliberately not invented here. how-we-build.md becomes the source of the mesh constitution, with a sync playbook, so the enforced copy stops being the only one that is true. Process becomes explicit: five playbooks, eight thin skills that defer to them, a repository map, and AGENTS.md with CLAUDE.md as its include. The five Observations become 04-ISSUES 001-005 where they can be owned and closed. 006 is new and uncomfortable: HQ is not indexed into the knowledge base. That claim is what decision 27 rests on, it was never checked, and the README now says so instead of repeating it. Also corrects the ADR index into something generated, the "02-DESIGN is empty" claim, the VISION.md pointer that did not survive the repo split, and a note asserting the symlink rule was contradicted — it was a misreading; the rule forbids hand-made links, the installer links by design.
38 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
38 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
status: open
|
|
opened: 2026-08-22
|
|
located-in: []
|
|
fixed-by:
|
|
amended-design:
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# 004 — Certificate issuance always targets the authority's production endpoint
|
|
|
|
## Symptom
|
|
|
|
The reverse proxy sets no staging endpoint for its certificate resolver. Issuance therefore
|
|
goes to the public authority's production endpoint in every case, including experiments.
|
|
|
|
## Why this matters
|
|
|
|
Production issuance is rate-limited per domain and per account. Every certificate experiment on
|
|
a real node consumes quota that is not replenished quickly, and exhausting it is not
|
|
recoverable by retrying — it removes the ability to issue a certificate anyone actually needs.
|
|
|
|
The consequence lands hardest on exactly the work most likely to iterate: standing up a new
|
|
node, changing how names resolve, or testing the lab's certificate authority split
|
|
([ADR 0016](../../adr/0016-a-lab-node-is-a-virtual-machine.md)).
|
|
|
|
## Evidence
|
|
|
|
- The resolver configuration declares no staging endpoint.
|
|
- Observed 2026-08-22.
|
|
|
|
## Open questions
|
|
|
|
- Should the endpoint be a node property — production for nodes serving real traffic, staging
|
|
everywhere else — rather than a fixed proxy setting?
|
|
- The lab issues its own certificates and so does not consume public quota at all. Does that
|
|
make this a problem only for experiments run outside the lab, and therefore an argument for
|
|
running them inside it?
|