Skip to content

Find the claims behind the settled decisions that no source supports #363

Closed

Description

@ExtraToast

Question

Which claims do the map's settled decisions rest on that no source supports yet, and does each hold?

Read every line under the map's "Decisions so far" and the resolution each links. List each claim about a third-party tool or about the live estate that the answer depends on and that neither docs/research/ nor a cited primary source backs. The decisions most likely to hold such claims are the ones that retire or replace a component: Traefik ACME issuing the wildcard in place of cert-manager, VSO as the only secret delivery with rabbitmq in the grant union, L4 exposure through a LoadBalancer on k3s, the hard across: node spread, a suspended CronJob for parked, and the node agents derived from node facts.

For each listed claim, find the primary source (the tool's own documentation or source, or a read-only look at the live cluster) and record whether the claim holds, holds with a condition, or fails. A claim that fails is flagged on the ticket whose decision rests on it; this ticket does not reopen that decision.

The output is a cited table in docs/research/.

Activity

  1. added
    type: docsDocumentation-only change.
    area: deployhomelab-deploy, deploy-v2, manifests, and rollout flow.
    wayfinder:researchWayfinder ticket resolved by reading primary sources (AFK)
    on Oct 12, 2026
  2. self-assigned this
    on Oct 12, 2026
  3. ExtraToast commented on Oct 12, 2026

    @ExtraToast
    ContributorAuthor

    Resolution

    Researched on 2026-10-12. The cited table is docs/research/unsupported-claims.md, landing through #365 (branch research/unsupported-claims, commit 2161456).

    Method. Every line under the map's "Decisions so far" was read with the resolution it links. A claim is listed when a decision depends on it and neither docs/research/ nor a primary source cited in the resolution backed it. Each was traced to the tool's own documentation or source at the version the cluster runs, or to the live estate: JorisJonkers-dev/fleet-infra at 4e4a9bb, JorisJonkers-dev/nix-config at 606e400, JorisJonkers-dev/estate at be99537, and read-only kubectl get against the cluster (k3s v1.35.2+k3s1).

    Result. 49 claims: 22 hold, 21 hold with a condition, 6 fail. Only the four live-need decisions and two lines of the versioning and handover-order decisions lean on third-party behaviour; the other resolutions decide the repository's own shape.

    The six that fail

    id claim what is true instead decision it sits under
    C4 The wildcard has one consumer, the public Traefik The LAN Traefik serves it on ten routes, and an ACME certificate is not a Secret another instance can read Decide how the foundation's HelmReleases are rendered and owned
    C28 Alloy is a host-privileged node agent It tails logs through the Kubernetes API, with no host mount, host network or privilege same
    C17 A LoadBalancer is the one L4 mechanism, so stalwart leaves hostPort The Frankfurt node has no address pool and one public address; the public Traefik there uses hostPort too Decide how the model meets the live needs no chapter covers
    C33 A non-root process cannot bind a port below 1024 k3s sets containerd's enable_unprivileged_ports, so it can, in any pod off the host network (from source, not drilled) same
    C8 agents-api reads a RabbitMQ dynamic credential today It reads the static KV path; the dynamic credential was dropped after an outage same
    C43 A dashboard without a uid collides like a duplicate one grafana-operator falls back to the object's Kubernetes UID, so the address changes on recreation and nothing is overwritten Decide how the model meets human access grants and Grafana content

    Each is flagged in a comment on the ticket whose decision rests on it, and on Order the Project handovers and what the spec must settle before each for C17 and C49. Five of them were spot-checked a second time against the k3s and grafana-operator source and the fleet-infra manifests before flagging.

    Conditions and gaps

    The 21 conditions are stated per row in the file. Not verified, with the reason for each, is its own section there: the LAN certificate by handshake, whether any image reads the injected Vault token, Vault's own state, a second address for the Frankfurt node, dcgm-exporter's host requirements, a backup image for Garage, and which other charts template their CRDs. Four claims are reasoned from documentation or source and still need a drill: the rollout stall under across: node (C21), the single immediate run on unpark (C22), the low-port bind as non-root (C33) and the VIP failover time (C18).

    Consequences for other tickets

    This ticket reopens nothing. Two tickets carry what it found:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

area: deployhomelab-deploy, deploy-v2, manifests, and rollout flow.type: docsDocumentation-only change.wayfinder:researchWayfinder ticket resolved by reading primary sources (AFK)

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions