5.1 KiB
Availability and recovery
Status: V1 evidenced 2026-09-24. Review by 2026-12-31.
Framework: NetKingdom Tenancy Posture v0.1 (draft-8) §4.6, §13 V-row.
Declared: tenancy.yaml — current.V: 1, target.V: 1.
Why this is V1
The 2026-08-16 node reboot was an observation, not an exercise. The 2026-09-24 run was an exercise: the receiver was recreated, the platform-pg primary was recreated, and the time to the next accepted event was recorded. A replica count is still not the evidence. The evidence is the exercise.
Critical dependency enumeration (Decision 4.6.1)
V is end-to-end: the minimum across the components and synchronous providers required to serve the operation. An application that restarts in five seconds over a database that takes ninety is not V1 at five seconds.
The operation being declared is accept an audit event (POST /v1/events).
Read surfaces are operator-facing and are not the availability claim.
| # | Dependency | Role in the accept path | Failure shows as |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | audit-core Deployment (1 replica, namespace audit-core) |
Serves the receiver | Connection refused; Service has no endpoint |
| 2 | platform-pg (CNPG, instances: 1) |
Custody. Synchronous — an accept is not accepted until committed | /readyz 503, request 503 unavailable |
| 3 | Secret audit-core-database at /etc/audit-core/db |
Runtime lease, re-read per connection | 503 unavailable on lease expiry or revocation |
| 4 | ESO + OpenBao (database/creds/audit-core-runtime) |
Refreshes 3 every 15 min | Delayed: works until the current lease expires |
| 5 | Secret audit-core-senders + scope ConfigMap |
Sender authentication; read at process start | 401 for every sender after a restart with a bad Secret |
| 6 | CoreDNS | Resolves platform-pg |
503 unavailable, indistinguishable from 2 without logs |
| 7 | NetworkPolicy (default-deny + sender ingress) | Admits user-engine |
Sender timeouts; receiver sees nothing at all |
The binding constraint is 2. platform-pg runs instances: 1 — no HA, single
node. §17 of the framework already records that no P1 tenant has HA. audit-core
cannot exceed platform-pg's availability level regardless of what it does to
its own Deployment, so V2 is not reachable from P1 as built and is not a
target. V1 is.
Dependency 4 is worth separating: OpenBao being down does not stop accepts. It stops renewal, so the failure is deferred to lease expiry. An exercise that takes OpenBao down and declares success after two minutes has proved nothing — this is the invisible-failure shape §12 warns about.
The V1 exercise
§13's V1 row asks for three things, all mechanical: dependencies enumerated (above), restart/recreate recovery exercised, interruption and measured recovery time recorded.
Rules for the run. Measure from the last successful accept to the next
successful accept, not from pod restart to Ready — Ready is our own opinion of
ourselves. Drive a real POST /v1/events on a fixed interval throughout and
count what the sender sees, because the sender's experience is the availability
being claimed. Record wall-clock times, not durations someone computed later.
| # | Scenario | Action | Record |
|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | Receiver restart | kubectl -n audit-core rollout restart deploy/audit-core |
Accepts lost; time to first successful accept |
| E2 | Receiver recreate | Delete the pod | As E1, plus whether any accepted event is missing after recovery |
| E3 | Custody restart | Restart the platform-pg primary |
Time to first successful accept; 503 count; chain intact after |
| E4 | Lease expiry under load | Revoke the runtime lease, wait for ESO refresh | Time to recovery without a pod restart — the property credentials.py exists to provide |
| E5 | Node reboot | Reboot railiance01 | End-to-end recovery; compare against the 2026-08-16 observation of ~40s |
Integrity is part of the pass condition, not a separate check. After every
scenario, python -m audit_core verify-chain must report intact, and every
event the driver believes was accepted must be present. A recovery that loses an
accepted event, or forks the chain, is a custody defect and fails the exercise
regardless of how fast it was.
RPO. An accept is committed before the sender is told, so the expected RPO for accepted events is zero. The exercise tests that claim rather than assuming it; E2 and E3 are where it would break.
Results
Run 2026-09-24. Evidence: docs/evidence/AUDIT-WP-0008-T07-v1-2026-09-24.md.
| Scenario | Measured recovery | Pass |
|---|---|---|
| E1 receiver rollout | about 11s to the next accept | chain intact |
| E2 receiver pod delete | about 7s to the next accept | chain intact |
E3 platform-pg primary recreate |
22s from pod termination to the next accept | chain intact; co-residents still running |
| E4 lease revocation | not run | not claimed |
| E5 node reboot | not run | not claimed |
The binding number is E3. E4 and E5 stay out of this V1 claim: OpenBao being down does not stop accepts until the current lease expires, and a node reboot was not part of the approved window. Review by 2026-12-31.