The predecessor serves the registry under a public name, behind htpasswd basic auth, with a
twenty-gigabyte body limit for layer pushes. The mesh's registry has no name, no lock and no
limit — by design inside the mesh, where the private network is the boundary and every node
pulls without an account (hq ADR 0082). Taking the name over must not change that.
A route on `distribution` itself would: contributing a route is requiring one, and the store
is raised at genesis on a node with no proxy. So the public door is `distribution-gate`, a
second registry process on the same volume, behind the registry's own htpasswd (the
predecessor's realm, the predecessor's file, carried in with `secret accept`), with the
route and its limit. It requires the store's storage as a node-scoped provision, so it can
only land beside the store. The store's own door is untouched — no auth, no htpasswd — which
is what keeps the builder's pushes and every node's pulls working.
Both processes read the predecessor's configuration where it changed behaviour: delete
enabled, which tag retention depends on; no per-process descriptor cache, which two
processes over one store cannot share; the CORS headers for the retired interface dropped.
route-adapter writes the limit as the predecessor's own buffering middleware, named after
the router, only when asked for — and skips a route whose limit it cannot read rather than
carrying what the module said not to.
hq ADR 0082/0104, the registry hand-over.
A module's identity is the software it is (ADR 0040). Two were named after the
job instead, and the job already had a name.
firewall installs the nftables package and runs nftables.service. The seat it
claims is the-packet-filter, which is correctly named for the role. Calling the
module firewall named neither the software nor the provision, and promised that
any firewall could sit there — the false genericity the naming rule forbids.
registry runs Distribution, the OCI reference implementation, and provides
artifact-store. So registry was a third name for a thing that already had two,
which is how one word ended up meaning the module, the software and the concept
in the same paragraph.
The capability stays firewall, and correctly: a capability IS a functionality, so
a node having one and fail2ban requiring one are both right. Only the module
moves.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01D6qtiYU3P9jk3pnAXyAFyx
jschoubben