Commit Graph
6 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
jschoubben b72b71a989 The host applies the newest declaration, a file may be created once, the foundation filters first
031: a window of unacknowledged declarations is drained to the newest; the
rest are set aside and reported as superseded. 035: a file resource may say
create-once — written when absent, kept untouched when present (ADR 0087).
054: the bundle installs nftables and loads a base ruleset before the store
and broker, in the table the filter module later replaces (ADR 0088).
2026-09-21 12:11:52 +02:00
jschoubben 121367319d Rename mesh-control -> mesh-controller, substrate -> foundation
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
2026-09-16 18:40:40 +02:00
jschoubben 8211d8b6fb A report says which declaration it is about
The mesh decided "has this machine caught up" by comparing its send
time to the report's arrival, and lost the race it invited: an apply
started under the previous declaration finishes after the next one is
sent, its report lands newer than the send, and the machine reads as
caught up with words it has not read yet. The lab hit exactly that —
one test's closing push was still being applied when the next test's
push recorded its send, and the next test then read files that were
never going to be there yet.

Clocks cannot answer "which". The report now carries the digest of the
exact bytes it applied — the same bytes, hashed the same way, that the
mesh recorded when it sent them — and which-declaration becomes an
equality the mesh checks rather than an ordering it hopes.
2026-09-02 00:01:12 +02:00
jschoubben b91342a6bd A machine says which ports it already holds
novox/hq ADR 0038 and 04-ISSUES/028. The substrate is not a module: a
node raises it from the bundle it carries before any mesh exists, so the
control plane has never heard of the store, the broker, or the control
plane's own container. A module assigned afterwards is handed a port one
of them holds, and finds out from a container runtime three layers down.

The host already recorded which resources it carried and which the mesh
sent — that distinction exists so the two never remove each other. It
now also records what each one binds, and reports the carried ones.

What the declaration binds, not what is open. A machine's open ports are
a moving target — something a person started, a connection the kernel
handed out — and assigning around those would mean a port that was free
when it was asked for and taken when it was used. What a resource
declares is stable, and it is the half the mesh can be responsible for.

Only the carried ones are reported. What the mesh put here it already
knows, and reporting it back would make the machine an authority on the
mesh's own bookkeeping.
2026-09-01 18:29:39 +02:00
jschoubben 4bff67ec69 A machine waiting to be enrolled is not a broken one
The launcher already ran `host run`, and `run` on a machine with no identity
exited with an error. So a freshly installed host, sitting exactly as intended
waiting for somebody to bring it a token, would have counted three failed
starts and rolled back its own installation.

It waits now, and says what it is waiting for. That is the *hosted* state from
the lifecycle: the host is running, it has no identity, and there is nobody to
link to. Every machine passes through it.

An identity that exists and cannot be read is still a fault rather than a wait.
Treating that as "not enrolled yet" would leave a node sitting quietly for ever
while the mesh believes it is a member.

Also: a node now says it is there once a minute. Nothing but its name, because
anything more would be a report, and reports are rare where this is constant --
reading one as the other would make a quiet node look like a stale one. Not
published mandatory, unlike a report: losing one is nothing, the next is a
minute away, and the mesh reads a gap rather than counting arrivals.

Verified in the lab: a node was stopped and the mesh said "out of touch 4m",
then it was started and the mesh said "here" again, without anything else being
touched.
2026-08-29 20:32:18 +02:00
jschoubben a488c76b5e A node holds its link open, and applies what the mesh signs
The loop the whole thing exists for: told, apply, report.

`run` holds one outbound connection open and consumes the node's own queue.
Every declaration is verified against the control plane's signing key before a
byte of it is read as an instruction -- not once at connect, every time. The
transport being pinned is a different question from the instruction being
genuine, and pinning only the first would make the second transitive: a
compromised broker could forge declarations, and this host applies whatever the
link delivers.

Malformed and forged are reported differently, because ADR 0004 requires a host
to tell "this is not from the mesh I joined" from "this is broken". One means
somebody is trying and the other means something needs fixing.

A node now keeps what it needs to come back on its own: the broker's address
and fingerprint, the signing key it believes, and its own broker password --
which the mesh issues at enrolment to replace the token's secret, so the
one-time thing stays one-time and the credential it holds for years is not the
one that was pasted into a terminal.

Verified in the lab end to end. The node enrolled, held its link, received a
signed declaration and applied it -- the file is on the machine with the right
contents, and the host's own record lists both resources.

That run also found issue 010, which is recorded in novox/hq: the declaration
removed every container on the machine, including the control plane that sent
it. Correct reconciliation, shared store, and the first thing that happens.
2026-08-29 16:23:27 +02:00