{a:1, b:2, c:3, password:hunter2} was proposed with "+ password: hunter2" in its Details: the router
withheld the line unnamed and Approve set a value the operator never saw (ADR 0347 §1, §3, §4). Each line is
now judged as the router judges it, masked under the content rule and whole under the secret rule; a line
refused is said "+ password (value withheld)", and any line the router would still refuse is refused at
propose in the controller's words, never echoing a secret-shaped key. SDK at mesh-sdk 5933eb7 (no two asks
digest the same).
Rebased on #305: Approve now sends the layer by a walk, so the summary's "takes it at its next push" was
false. The summary says it is set and sent at once by a walk to where it reaches, one machine at a time,
each judged; the rest of what Approve does (onApprove) leads the Details, beside every key whole.
The review of #304: with more than three keys the ask showed only the names of the rest, a long value was
cut without a word, and the Details held no key, so Approve bound values the operator never saw. The
Details now list every key uncut — masked, and whole in WholeDetails for a channel that proves who
answers — before who proposed it and the fingerprint; the glance says what it cut. Vendors mesh-sdk at
f474544 and captures its conformance events there.
The operator could not read the settings proposals on the phone: the change, the fingerprint and a how-to
paragraph in one wall of plain text, and the values masked as ‹path› and ‹address›, so the approval was
blind.
The ask is now a summary of what changes where ("Changes 3 setting(s) of mounts on shanks; approved, the
layer is set at once and shanks takes it at its next push."), then at most three points, one key each (more
keys: the first two and the names of the rest). Who proposed it, the fingerprint and how to read it whole
are its Details, which the router notes after the answers. The change is carried twice: under the content
rule, and whole (asks.Ask.Whole), shown only on a channel that proves who answers, a value shaped like a
secret withheld in both (from the earlier work on issue 383, #202).
Vendors mesh-sdk at 9588871 (fix/639-an-ask-reads-at-a-glance: Message.Note, asks.Glance), and captures its
conformance events at that commit.
mesh/merge-gate head 1219ec822943 merged into trunk 6f1a05366c1d — pass: builds build-agent, mesh-controller → ace, g14, novox, shanks; no bus step; every …
A judged send carries what waits on its machine, which would have released
builds held after a failed walk without a person's word. The settings walk
now keeps every build of its machine, refuses a send that would move a
running module's data, and never says delivered when it reached no machine.
mesh/merge-gate head e324f5d82162 merged into trunk 6f1a05366c1d — pass: builds build-agent, mesh-controller → ace, g14, novox, shanks; no bus step; every …
The warrant set the layer and left the push as a second act nobody took: the
operator approved a betterbird change on Telegram and nothing reached g14.
Now the warrant opens a settings walk: the machines the layer reaches, one at
a time, the module judged on each at its gate, its end told once through
plan-moved. The ask and the proposer's answer say so instead of naming push.
change held asking back, a list sent was taken for a list the bus enforces, a plan that could not be
worked out read as not behind, and no test held the real judgement. Now the asker asks only when the
composition grants the controller itself to publish its ask, and the bus's own module says that grant
is in force on the running server (nats_user_can's in_force, mesh-catalog); each fact not known is not
held, said with why. brokerBehind takes a list nobody could compose as behind.
mesh/merge-gate pass: builds build-agent, mesh-controller → ace, g14, novox, shanks; no bus step; every machine composes with the change as it did without …
Issue 339 made every trusted setting the controller's terminal's alone, so an agent could only hand the
operator a line to type at the control node. Now anyone the bus admits may PROPOSE a layer: settings
propose keeps the proposal in the controller's own asks (the asked bucket, which the controller alone
writes), judged as settings set judges, and asks the operator on the operator channel at the level
approve with every key, its exact new value (in its shape where a path or an address may not leave the
mesh), the was of a changed key, the removed keys and the layer's fingerprint. The serving controller
sets the layer on the warrant alone: once, for the ask it holds, only when the record's values still
digest to what the option bound and the layer is still the one shown, with the terminal's judgement and
history, and keeps who approved it beside the layer, which settings says back (migration 0090). Decline,
expiry, a cancel, a replacement or the router's refusal discard it; nothing is asked when no router, no
grant or no channel can carry it. settings proposals lists them. The push afterwards is a separate act.
mesh-tools
jochen
jschoubben