The template raises the store with the password 'bootstrap' and the broker
with its image's default administrator, and the installer carried both into
the mesh as accepted secrets — permanent, and not secret (novox/hq issue 071).
Now the installer makes both credentials, once, at the paths the postgres and
lavinmq modules declare as their own secrets, rewrites the produced bundle to
use them (the store reads its password from a file; the broker's default
account is given the new password by an action before anything dials it), and
writes the bundle at 0600 since it now carries them.
Before the first secret is accepted it makes the operator's sealing key beside
the bundle and gives the mesh the public half, so everything minted from there
is sealed to it too (ADR 0085, amended). Phase three adopts the broker as the
lavinmq module beside the store and installs mesh-vault as a foundation module;
the run ends by writing the operator-sealed export beside the key.
One name per thing, per the HQ glossary: the module/container/image/binary/repo
becomes mesh-controller, the seat the-controller, and the store+broker pair the
foundation (embedded base bundles, default template and example lock renamed with
their go:embed directives). No behaviour change — a pure vocabulary rename.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01D6qtiYU3P9jk3pnAXyAFyx
The substrate raises a control plane and a module will later declare one. If both
are called `mesh-control` then for one moment two owners hold one container, and
the host — which tracks what it owns — has no way to stop owning something without
destroying it. That looked like a missing mechanism.
It is a naming problem. The substrate's container becomes `temp-mesh-control` and
the module's keeps the plain name: two containers, two owners, nothing to hand
over. Dropping the temporary one from the bundle at the end is then destruction by
omission, which is what the host already does to anything that leaves a
declaration — and the right end for something named "temp" (novox/hq ADR 0067).
The rename is textual and matches the QUOTED name, so the `mesh-control` inside
the image reference is not caught by it. Read back afterwards: the produced bundle
must call it the temporary name, and no other container may have been renamed.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LrgweAeERJYBg88c5cKDzF
The only complete written-down copy of how a mesh is stood up was an integration
test in the lab. That is why every bootstrap gap kept being found late: an install
procedure that lives as a test fixture is exercised by whoever writes tests, never
by whoever installs. This is that procedure.
A separate binary, not a mesh-host subcommand. mesh-host says of itself that it
connects to nothing and listens on nothing and that what it applies comes from a
file, and that sentence is what makes an always-running root daemon auditable. An
installer loads images and interrogates a control plane. Same tier, different
program.
The control plane's image is carried, not built and not fetched. The forge that
holds its source runs on the mesh, so a bootstrap that had to fetch it would need
a mesh in order to raise one. Embedding breaks that cycle the way the carried
bundle breaks "copy it onto a machine and run it". The image id is read out of the
saved tar before the runtime is asked anything, which is what makes the load
idempotent: the installer can ask whether the machine already holds exactly this.
Five steps, each idempotent and each saying whether it found or changed something,
because this is run over and over by somebody getting a machine working. It stops
at a running substrate with a control plane that replies — enrolment, the module
catalogue and assignment are the next stage and are deliberately absent.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LrgweAeERJYBg88c5cKDzF
jschoubben