37 lines
1.6 KiB
Markdown
37 lines
1.6 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
status: open
|
|
opened: 2026-10-02
|
|
located-in: []
|
|
fixed-by:
|
|
amended-design:
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# 200 — The controller's answer to a long console call is refused by the bus
|
|
|
|
## What was observed
|
|
|
|
2026-10-02. A `push` of the control node asked through the console came back as *mesh-controller.push
|
|
did not answer in time. Something is serving it, so this is the tool being slow rather than absent.*
|
|
The push had run; the machine applied. The bus's log on the control node, at the same moment:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
[ERR] 10.10.0.1:56030 - cid:4015 - Publish Violation - User "controller",
|
|
Subject "_INBOX.shanks.mesh-console.WRNO5V9IJ1FX35AU5NRBEB.WRNO5V9IJ1FX35AU5PN1UW"
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
The controller's reply to the console's request was refused: the controller's bus account may not
|
|
publish to the console's reply inbox. Shorter calls (`status`, `node`, `nodes`) answer; the long ones
|
|
(`push` of a large machine, `issue`) time out on the console's side although they succeed.
|
|
|
|
## Why it matters beyond this instance
|
|
|
|
A call that succeeds and is reported as a timeout sends a person to retry what already happened — a
|
|
second push, a second issue — and reads as the mesh being slow when it is the mesh refusing itself.
|
|
Whether the inbox prefix the console uses is the one the controller's account is allowed to answer, or
|
|
the request outlives the inbox subscription, is what a diagnosis has to tell apart.
|
|
|
|
## Open questions
|
|
|
|
- Which reply inboxes may the controller's account publish to, and which does the console request on?
|
|
- Does a reply after the requester's timeout count as a violation, or is the prefix itself refused?
|