Backlog NK-WP-0027 and document demand-driven resumption
All checks were successful
CI Smoke / host-smoke (push) Successful in 0s
CI Smoke / container-smoke (push) Successful in 2s

Assistant: codex
Assistant-Model: gpt-6-astra
Assistant-Session: 01a13eab-1e6a-7b33-9c37-372e90ada3a2
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-10-15 22:27:57 +02:00
parent b91bf46e82
commit 258c85420e

View file

@ -4,13 +4,13 @@ type: workplan
title: "Reconcile reef placement and security-zone canon dependencies"
domain: infotech
repo: net-kingdom
status: active
status: backlog
flavor: residual
owner: net-kingdom
topic_slug: netkingdom
planning_priority: P1
created: "2026-08-19"
updated: "2026-10-03"
updated: "2026-10-15"
state_hub_workstream_id: "965ad365-6b81-50a1-a2a3-2d0c1fcce0b4"
---
@ -240,9 +240,9 @@ is externally owned:
3. `info-tech-canon` rules the `public`/synthetic relationship, after which
ops-warden can update `dataclass_floor` (T06).
The workplan is `blocked` rather than left nominally active with every open task
at `wait`. No human intervention is required yet; owner responses are the
ordinary next input.
The workplan is deliberately `backlog` following the October 15 owner
prioritization below. The three open tasks retain their `wait` status and
owner dependencies. Their completion is not required for current operations.
## Related
@ -278,3 +278,62 @@ Evidence and cross-plan priorities: [estate review](../history/2026-09-28-open-w
> critical path (identity → authz → secrets → SecurityCase execution). Tasks are unchanged;
> promote back when demand or risk appears. See the-custodian
> `history/20261011-netkingdom-security-progress-assessment.md`.
## Resumption approach — 2026-10-15
Owner requested that this work remain in backlog after reviewing its value.
From NetKingdom's point of view, the benefit is reliable policy input: a
workload's availability claim must respect the substrate's evidenced ceiling,
and disclosure classification must have an explicit maturity mapping. This
work improves the accuracy of declarations and policy decisions; it does not
itself add redundancy or improve uptime. For the current small team, pursue
it when a concrete consumer needs the result rather than for declaration
coverage alone.
**Resume when** a named deployment-admission or credential-policy consumer
will use reef ceilings or the public-data maturity floor, or a concrete risk
review identifies an overstated availability claim that needs mechanical
prevention. Record the consumer, the decision it needs to make, its responsible
owner, and the acceptance example before promoting the plan. Do not infer
renewed demand merely from the presence of waiting tasks.
**Start from the existing proposal**, `docs/reef-posture-provider-contract.md`,
and recheck current owner sources. On October 15, the authoritative
`reef-railiance/declarations/reef.yaml` still has no `posture_provider` block;
InfoTechCanon's Data Model includes `public`, while ops-warden's
`registry/policy/security-posture.yaml` still has no public maturity floor.
These source checks establish the outstanding artifacts, not owner acceptance
of the proposal or a fresh runtime topology measurement.
Use this sequence when picking the work up:
1. **Settle the reef contract (T02).** Prepare a concrete schema/declaration
change with repo-manager and railiance-infra. Repo-manager accepts the
authoritative carrier and field names; railiance-infra owns the ceiling,
consumer conditions, current evidence and review dates. Treat the proposed
V0 available / V1 maximum as a starting proposal requiring current owner
evidence. Record acceptance in owner source before adopting the contract.
2. **Implement and exercise the join (T03).** NetKingdom owns posture semantics
and the reconciler. Resolve placement from authoritative declarations,
compose availability across synchronous providers, and preserve
`satisfied`, `unsatisfied` and `unknown`. Test claims above the ceiling,
missing or stale evidence, and unmet recovery conditions. Exercise the
accepted contract against the named consumer and retain reproducible
declaration revisions and results before marking this task done.
3. **Resolve classification and map it (T06).** Obtain InfoTechCanon's recorded
ruling separating public disclosure from synthetic provenance. Then have
ops-warden adopt the authoritative maturity mapping and test its consumer
behavior. The existing `public -> M1` suggestion remains a proposal;
do not alias public to synthetic or silently guess a floor.
4. **Close on owner artifacts and consumer evidence.** Reconcile all three
tasks against the accepted declarations, implementation and tests; update
source statuses and run `statehub fix-consistency --repo net-kingdom`.
Mark the plan finished only when those artifacts exist.
The reef and classification owner discussions can proceed independently once
work is resumed. No cluster expansion is a prerequisite: the first useful
result may correctly document and enforce the existing single-domain limit.
Any subsequent runtime or admission-policy activation must follow the named
consumer owner's rollout contract. Until then, unresolved facts remain
`unknown`; backlog status supplies no new policy exception or permission.