jschoubben
ddfd62edf6
A grant is four facts and a credential — the provision, the machine, the port, and who the consumer is when it connects — and it is the whole mechanism by which anything in the mesh reaches anything else. The mesh asserted it and never found out whether it was true. Issue 145 is what that cost: eleven hours of 'every module current with its source' while a module could not reach its database. The consumer verifies it, from its own network position. Not the control plane, which reaches the address by a path no consumer uses. Not the machine, whose own packets carried a source address the filter admitted while every container's was refused — so a host-side check would have passed throughout the outage it exists to catch. That is inference from the rule that was loaded, stated as such. A connection and nothing more; speaking each provision's protocol would be a second implementation of every provision. One failure is not news, only consecutive ones, and the count is reported rather than the last attempt. A consumer that is not running reads unchecked, which is a different sentence from broken. What it costs to be wrong is the constraint on all of it: a check that calls a working provision broken trains a reader to ignore the report.
04-ISSUES
The front door for "something is wrong" at the level of the mesh's design or governance. Diagnosis happens here, where the whole mesh is in view; the fix lands in the owning code repository.
What belongs here
| Belongs here | Belongs in the knowledge base |
|---|---|
| The design permits a failure to be silent | How to fix one occurrence of it |
| A documented rule is enforced by nothing | A command that works around it |
| A stated invariant is false in practice | A node-specific quirk |
| The owner is unknown and finding it needs the whole mesh in view | Symptom → fix, once the answer is known |
The knowledge base already holds the operational record and is indexed on symptoms. This folder is not a second copy of it. An issue here is a question HQ must answer; an entry there is an incident someone must clear. An issue whose answer is a general lesson belongs in both.
Structure
NNN-short-name/
00-report.md the symptom as observed, with the evidence; status in frontmatter
01-diagnosis.md the investigation trail, dated, including what was ruled out
Frontmatter, on 00-report.md
---
status: open | diagnosing | located | resolved | wontfix
opened: YYYY-MM-DD
located-in: [] # owning repo(s) or module(s), filled by diagnosis
fixed-by: # pull request or commit reference, filled at resolution
amended-design: # design doc path, when the root cause was a design gap
---
Rules
- Anyone may open an issue. No localisation is required to report one.
- The full flow is playbook
00-META/process/03-issues.md. - Closed issues are never deleted — they are the mesh's symptom-to-component memory.
wontfixis legitimate and requires a sentence saying why.