tegwick
0b28ec570e
A provision can name which other provision satisfies a catalog dependency. Relation vocabulary is depends_on / may_use only. Quoted sits below the invoiced/measured peer pair for propagation.
123 lines
5.5 KiB
Markdown
123 lines
5.5 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
id: feedback/2026-08-15-resource-control-cap-restatement
|
|
type: consumer-feedback
|
|
status: acted-on
|
|
date: "2026-08-15"
|
|
consumer: resource-control
|
|
consumer_domain: financials
|
|
canon_version: "0.3.0"
|
|
artifacts:
|
|
- model/capability
|
|
related_demand:
|
|
- demand/CapabilityProvisionEconomics.md
|
|
- demand/EvidenceBasis.md
|
|
related_workplan:
|
|
- ITC-WP-0014
|
|
- ITC-WP-0015
|
|
spawned_demand:
|
|
- demand/EvidenceBasis.md
|
|
spawned_workplan:
|
|
- ITC-WP-0015
|
|
- ADHOC-2026-08-15
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Feedback: ITC-CAP 0.2.0 restatement of platform-audit-storage
|
|
|
|
**Consumer:** resource-control
|
|
**Canon version used:** 0.3.0 / ITC-CAP 0.2.0
|
|
**Artifacts exercised:** `model/capability` (`data.backup`, `data.object`,
|
|
requirement targets/constraints, native-unit consumption, D-scale, evidence
|
|
hooks)
|
|
**Related demand:** `demand/CapabilityProvisionEconomics.md` (criterion 6)
|
|
**Source record:** `resource-control` `data/capability/platform-audit-storage.json`
|
|
(commit `13c2b82`). Validator reads this catalog live; 44 capability/basis
|
|
tests pass; `make capability` reports the review below.
|
|
|
|
Steward-written from the consumer's restatement and the review output of
|
|
`tools/capability.py` against this repo's `capabilities.yaml`. Operational
|
|
facts stay in resource-control; this file is PurposeFit evidence only.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Consumer purpose
|
|
|
|
Restate a real backup procurement — requirement, two provisions, maturity,
|
|
four evidence hooks, and consumption — entirely in ITC-CAP 0.2.0 terms, so
|
|
the canon has a joinable proof rather than a worked example.
|
|
|
|
## Hits
|
|
|
|
- **CAP-R9 requirement shape.** `data.backup` / profile `database` /
|
|
`minimum_maturity: D5` / targets `rpo` 5 min, `rto` 60 min, `retention`
|
|
30 days / constraint `geographical_separation not_in [host:railiance01,
|
|
provider:host-europe]`. The consumer calls the constraint "the single most
|
|
useful thing you added for us." It was prose before 0.2.0; it is now a
|
|
closed, catalog-checked assertion.
|
|
- **Two provisions on one spine.** `resource:platform:audit-storage` provides
|
|
`data.object`; CNPG/Barman provides `data.backup` and depends on it. The
|
|
layering existed in their resource records and had no name.
|
|
- **D-scale used honestly.** Requirement asks D5; provision is D4;
|
|
review status `below_requirement`. Reliability is declared in thresholds
|
|
and rests on one backup (48 s), one full restore (65 s, 30=30 rows), one
|
|
PITR (65 s), ~four hours of operation; `wal_archive_gap_minutes` is
|
|
declared and not emitted. The scale did the work it was designed for.
|
|
- **Evidence hooks, complete on backup, incomplete on object.** All four
|
|
`data.backup` hooks are `measured` and point at the T05 evidence file.
|
|
`data.object` satisfies neither `object_integrity_tests` nor
|
|
`availability_metrics`; they report that rather than borrow the restore
|
|
drill.
|
|
- **Unknown versus zero.** `H` on the backup provision is `unknown` (effort
|
|
was spent, no time record). `I` is `unknown` on both. `N` restore egress
|
|
is `unknown`. Storage is `measured` 0.0066 GB (8 objects, 6 604 031 B).
|
|
The old model would have silently dropped the unknowns.
|
|
- **Live catalog join.** No catalog copy. Drift in either repo fails their
|
|
suite. This is CAP-R5 working as an interface.
|
|
|
|
Review (abridged): `data.backup` below_requirement D5←D4, evidence complete;
|
|
`data.object` evidence incomplete; alternatives grade `indicative`
|
|
(evidenced_ratio 0.25).
|
|
|
|
## Friction
|
|
|
|
- **Class `P` used as a stand-in for another capability.** The backup
|
|
provision records credential custody as `P` / 1 unit / `supply: internal`,
|
|
with a note that `security.secrets` is a separate capability. `P` is
|
|
purchased platform, not "a capability this provision also uses." They
|
|
invented `depends_on_provision` for the object-store layering (right idea)
|
|
and then stuffed secrets into a resource-class row (wrong kind). The model
|
|
names capability-to-capability `depends_on` / `may_use`, but a *provision*
|
|
has no first-class way to name another provision or capability it consumes
|
|
except by overloading `consumes`.
|
|
- **`typical_resource_classes` already gone.** Consumer notes we were right
|
|
to keep no hint, and right not to split finding C into its own workplan.
|
|
|
|
## Gaps
|
|
|
|
- **Evidence basis on a quantity.** Every value in their record carries an
|
|
ordered basis (`invoiced > measured > quoted > derived > projected >
|
|
estimated > assumed > unknown`), with "weakest input wins" on derivation.
|
|
It immediately graded their own Scaleway-over-Hetzner decision
|
|
`indicative`: the €29.14/month figure is assumed labour, not a
|
|
measurement. They have not filed this as demand. It sits naturally on
|
|
`CapabilityConsumption` but is broader than CAP — likely an ITC-GOV
|
|
Evidence concept that CAP imports. Same divergence argument as finding C.
|
|
- **Provision-to-provision dependency.** `depends_on_provision` is their
|
|
local field. The catalog graph is capability-to-capability. A provision
|
|
record has no canon field for the binding they needed.
|
|
|
|
## Drop candidates
|
|
|
|
None.
|
|
|
|
## Steward notes
|
|
|
|
- Status `acted-on`. Demand criterion 6 is met in the consumer repo.
|
|
ITC-CAP §10.3 was revised in canon 0.4.0: this record is the joinable
|
|
promotion proof (ITC-WP-0014 T11). Operational facts stay in
|
|
resource-control.
|
|
- Evidence-basis accepted as `demand/EvidenceBasis.md` and published as
|
|
ITC-GOV `EvidenceBasis` / CAP-R10 (ITC-WP-0015, canon 0.4.0).
|
|
- Provision-to-provision dependency accepted as
|
|
`demand/ProvisionRelationships.md` and published as `uses_provisions`
|
|
/ CAP-R11 (ADHOC-2026-08-15 T03, canon 0.5.0). Canon spelling is
|
|
`may_use`, not `uses`. Maturity is not capped across the dependency.
|