coulomb/railiance-fabric
2
0
Fork 0
generated from coulomb/repo-seed
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

docs: define financial fabric architecture

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Bernd Worsch
2026-05-24 00:25:59 +02:00
parent a1e99d9b34
commit 7db9c3cbf2
4 changed files with 757 additions and 5 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

19
README.md
View File

@@ -1,11 +1,20 @@
# Railiance Fabric
Railiance Fabric defines the repo-owned declaration model for the Railiance
ecosystem graph.
Railiance Fabric models the durable infrastructure-responsibility graph of the
Railiance netkingdom.
It will hold schemas, seed declarations, validation tools, graph queries, and
State Hub export contracts for services, capabilities, interfaces,
dependencies, and bindings across Railiance repositories.
Fabric is bounded by financial and operational accountability: who pays for the
infrastructure, who is accountable for keeping it alive, and which durable
interfaces create value across fabric and subfabric boundaries.
It holds schemas, discovery tools, registry services, graph queries, and State
Hub export contracts for services, machines, repositories, deployables,
endpoints, ownership, dependencies, and bindings across Railiance deployment
realities.
See `docs/FabricDiscoveryAndUpdate.md` for the current architecture direction
for fabric boundaries, king/lord/tenant ownership, discovery, rebuilds, and
update loops.
## Validate Declarations

289
docs/FabricDiscoveryAndUpdate.md Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,289 @@
# Fabric Discovery And Update
## Intent
`railiance-fabric` models the durable infrastructure-responsibility graph of the
Railiance netkingdom.
A fabric is not a repository, environment, cluster, deployment scenario, or
security zone. A fabric is the financial and operational responsibility boundary
around infrastructure: who pays for it, who is accountable for it, and who has
the authority to keep it alive.
The graph exists to answer:
- what infrastructure, services, repositories, deployables, endpoints, and
machines exist;
- who owns or pays for each node;
- which fabrics and subfabrics contain those nodes;
- which durable interfaces cross ownership boundaries;
- which cross-boundary interfaces provide utility that may carry business value.
Fabric intentionally stays out of live operational telemetry. It may represent
that a service, host, endpoint, or deployment exists because durable automation
or configuration proves it. It should not represent whether that thing is
currently healthy, loaded, failing, or profitable in the accounting sense.
## Financial Boundary Terms
Fabric uses financial responsibility terms for fabric boundaries.
### King
The king is responsible for the whole netkingdom.
The king has the key to the netkingdom. Literally, this means the master key or
at least a relevant key component for secrets, backups, and recovery paths across
the infrastructure under the netkingdom.
The king also holds the legal and contractual relationship with all lords and
tenants. Even when responsibility is delegated, the king remains the actor that
can ultimately restore, recover, govern, or terminate the netkingdom.
### Lord
A lord pays for a fabric.
A lord is accountable for a durable infrastructure-responsibility boundary. In
the current Railiance setup there is one effective fabric because one actor pays
for all infrastructure. Additional fabrics appear when the responsibility to pay
for a coherent infrastructure boundary changes.
### Tenant
A tenant pays for restricted use of a subfabric.
A tenant is not the root payer for the whole fabric. A tenant receives bounded
access to utility inside a subfabric and may consume services or interfaces
provided by a lord, by the king, or by another tenant-facing utility.
## Fabrics, Subfabrics, And Views
### Fabric
A fabric is a durable responsibility boundary. Membership changes when financial
or operational responsibility changes, not when a service is redeployed, a repo
is refactored, a host is replaced, or an environment name changes.
Criteria for establishing a fabric:
- there is a lord who pays for the infrastructure in that boundary;
- the boundary can be discovered from durable infrastructure, deployment, or
contractual evidence;
- the boundary remains stable across ordinary deployment and development churn;
- ownership changes imply a meaningful change to who is accountable for cost,
continuity, recovery, and utility delivery.
### Subfabric
A subfabric is a delegated responsibility or tenancy partition within a fabric.
Subfabrics are useful when a tenant receives restricted access to infrastructure
or utility while the parent fabric remains under a lord or king. A subfabric may
eventually become a separate fabric if payment, control, recovery, and legal
responsibility move to another lord.
### View
A view is a diagnostic or informational slice through the graph.
Views can filter by repository, service, environment, machine, endpoint, tenant,
workstream, deployment stack, or business capability. Views do not define fabric
membership and should not mutate fabric boundaries.
### Environment
An environment such as local, dev, staging, production, or lab is a deployment
classification inside a fabric. It is not a fabric by itself.
### Deployment Scenario
A deployment scenario is a realized or planned arrangement of services,
machines, endpoints, automation, and configuration. It belongs inside a fabric
or subfabric but does not define the financial boundary.
## Ownership Rule
Every node in the Fabric graph must carry owner information.
Ownership may be explicit on the node or inherited from the containing fabric or
subfabric, but it must be resolvable. Nodes without resolvable ownership are
incomplete because Fabric cannot explain who is accountable for their cost,
continuity, recovery, or utility.
Ownership should identify the relevant king, lord, tenant, or delegated operator
where applicable. Operators and maintainers may be represented as supporting
actors, but they do not replace the financial boundary terms unless they also
pay for or legally own the responsibility boundary.
## Cross-Boundary Edges
Edges may cross fabric and subfabric boundaries.
These edges are especially important. They are where one owned boundary consumes
utility from another owned boundary. They are also where business value can
appear: paid access, cost recovery, shared platform utility, tenant-facing
interfaces, or contractual service delivery.
Fabric should treat cross-boundary interfaces as first-class graph facts. A
cross-boundary utility edge should be able to identify:
- provider owner;
- consumer owner;
- provider fabric or subfabric;
- consumer fabric or subfabric;
- exposed endpoint, contract, service, or utility;
- durable evidence for the relationship;
- expected payment or business model when known;
- metering basis when known.
The existence of a cross-boundary interface belongs in Fabric. Live usage,
current health, latency, revenue events, and incident state belong to telemetry,
accounting, or operational systems outside the Fabric core.
## Cost And Profit Center Attribution
Cost centers and profit centers are accounting attributions. They are not fabric
boundaries by themselves.
A cost center may be evidence that a responsibility boundary exists, especially
when it corresponds to a lord who pays for infrastructure. However, the fabric
boundary is still established by financial and operational accountability, not
by the accounting label alone.
Cost and profit center attribution may overlap with fabrics and subfabrics:
- one fabric may contain many cost centers;
- one tenant may span several cost centers;
- one cost center may include nodes from multiple subfabrics;
- one shared service may allocate cost across several tenants or cost centers;
- one cross-boundary utility may be cost-bearing for one actor and
profit-bearing for another.
Fabric should therefore support optional accounting attribution on nodes and
edges without allowing that attribution to redefine containment:
- node cost center;
- node profit center;
- edge cost allocation model;
- edge profit attribution;
- payment schema;
- metering or allocation basis when known;
- attribution validity period when known.
This lets Fabric build cost-center and profit-center views while preserving the
durability of fabric membership. A node moving from one cost center to another
does not necessarily move fabrics. A node moves fabrics only when financial or
operational responsibility for the infrastructure boundary changes.
Useful accounting views include:
- all infrastructure attributed to a cost center;
- all cross-boundary utility edges attributed to a profit center;
- tenant-facing utilities without a payment schema;
- shared services with unresolved allocation;
- owned nodes without cost-center attribution;
- expensive or critical infrastructure with no visible value interface.
## Discovery Approach
Fabric discovery should start from accountability roots, not from arbitrary repo
ownership declarations.
Useful roots include:
- the king and current netkingdom inventory;
- lords and their fabrics;
- tenants and their subfabrics;
- State Hub attached repositories and known host paths;
- Gitea organizations and repository URLs;
- deployment automation repositories;
- Docker, Compose, Kubernetes, systemd, reverse proxy, and infrastructure
manifests;
- backup, recovery, and secret-management evidence;
- service endpoint and API specifications;
- CI/CD and release automation that proves deployables and deployment targets.
The scanner follows these roots outward to discover durable evidence of nodes
and edges. Repository-local facts can still help identify deployables, APIs, and
artifacts, but repository-owned declarations should not be the default source of
truth for external fabric relations.
## Rebuild From Scratch
A full rebuild should be deterministic enough to repeat and provenance-rich
enough to review.
Recommended phases:
1. Establish the netkingdom root and current king.
2. Register known lords, fabrics, tenants, and subfabrics.
3. Register durable discovery roots for each fabric and subfabric.
4. Crawl deployment automation, infrastructure manifests, repo inventories,
service configs, and endpoint contracts.
5. Store raw evidence with source paths, URLs, timestamps, scanner versions, and
content hashes.
6. Normalize identities across host paths, repository URLs, image names, service
names, endpoint names, and deployment names.
7. Build candidate graph nodes and edges.
8. Resolve or flag ownership for every node.
9. Promote accepted candidates into a versioned fabric snapshot.
10. Export the accepted snapshot to State Hub as a read model.
## Keeping The Model Up To Date
Fabric freshness should be based on durable configuration and automation changes,
with scheduled rescans as a safety net.
Rescan triggers include:
- deployment automation changes;
- infrastructure manifest changes;
- State Hub attached repository inventory changes;
- repository changes that affect deployables, APIs, images, service names,
endpoint contracts, ports, or deployment configuration;
- tenant or lord changes;
- backup, recovery, or secret-root changes;
- manual operator requests;
- scheduled periodic rebuilds.
Normal source-code edits do not necessarily change the Fabric graph. Fabric
should focus on changes that alter durable topology, ownership, deployment,
interfaces, or cross-boundary utility.
Each update should compare new discovery output with the previous accepted
snapshot and produce a delta. The delta should distinguish:
- added, changed, and removed nodes;
- added, changed, and removed edges;
- changed ownership;
- changed fabric or subfabric membership;
- new or removed cross-boundary utility interfaces;
- ambiguous identity merges that need review;
- discovered nodes without resolvable ownership.
## Boundary With Security Terms
Fabric should avoid using security-zone language for its core concepts.
Terms such as realm, domain, tenant realm, identity realm, and security domain
are useful in systems such as Microsoft environments or Keycloak, but they carry
security and identity-management semantics. Fabric may later relate to those
systems as discovered evidence, but the core Fabric concept is financial and
operational responsibility, not identity or access-control topology.
For now, use:
- king, lord, and tenant for financial responsibility actors;
- fabric and subfabric for durable responsibility boundaries;
- view for diagnostic graph slices;
- environment for deployment classification.
## State Hub Role
State Hub coordinates work and stores a readable projection of the Fabric graph.
It should not be the primary author of Fabric topology.
`railiance-fabric` discovers, normalizes, versions, and exports Fabric snapshots.
State Hub imports those snapshots so agents and operators can ask practical
questions about work, ownership, dependencies, and cross-boundary utility.

241
workplans/RAIL-FAB-WP-0017-financial-fabric-model-reset.md Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,241 @@
---
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0017
type: workplan
title: "Financial Fabric Model Reset"
domain: railiance
repo: railiance-fabric
status: ready
owner: codex
topic_slug: railiance
created: "2026-05-23"
updated: "2026-05-23"
state_hub_workstream_id: "39cc363c-6e2a-46a2-bd19-cee7ff6fc149"
---
# RAIL-FAB-WP-0017 - Financial Fabric Model Reset
## Goal
Adapt `railiance-fabric` to the revised Fabric intent captured in
`docs/FabricDiscoveryAndUpdate.md`.
Fabric should model durable infrastructure-responsibility boundaries rather
than repo-owned external relation declarations. The core model must understand
the Railiance netkingdom, king/lord/tenant financial actors, fabric and
subfabric containment, resolvable node ownership, cross-boundary utility
interfaces, and optional cost/profit center attribution.
## Background
The current Fabric implementation grew from repo-owned declarations and a
canon-aligned graph export. That was useful for bootstrapping, but it now
misplaces authority for external relations: a repository cannot sustainably own
all deployment contexts, tenant relations, or cross-boundary utility edges in
which it participates.
The updated architecture establishes these principles:
- a fabric is bounded by financial and operational accountability;
- the king is responsible for the whole netkingdom and holds the relevant
recovery/secrets/backups authority;
- a lord pays for a fabric;
- a tenant pays for restricted use of a subfabric;
- every node needs resolvable ownership;
- cross-boundary utility edges are first-class value interfaces;
- cost/profit centers are accounting attributions and view dimensions, not
fabric boundaries;
- Fabric should avoid security-zone terms such as realm or domain for its core
concepts.
This workplan resets the Fabric contract and internal model so later discovery
work can rebuild the graph from accountability roots and deployment automation.
## T01 - Audit Current Model Assumptions
```task
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0017-T01
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "3d259e3c-5534-4b6a-930a-d085d3db57e4"
```
Inventory the current assumptions that must change.
Scope:
- schema files and declaration shapes under `schemas/` and `fabric/`;
- Python model classes and validators;
- registry storage tables and snapshot materialization;
- State Hub export payload shape;
- tests and fixtures that assume repo-owned declarations are the primary graph
source;
- documentation that still describes Fabric as repo-owned external relation
declarations.
Done when:
- affected files and APIs are listed;
- compatibility risks are documented;
- the migration approach for existing accepted graph data is explicit;
- follow-on tasks have enough detail to implement without rediscovering the
whole codebase.
## T02 - Define The VNext Fabric Semantic Contract
```task
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0017-T02
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "8bbab878-0bff-4302-a925-15a8aceabf9b"
```
Define the next graph contract for Fabric snapshots and exports.
Required concepts:
- netkingdom root;
- actor nodes for king, lord, tenant, and supporting operators/stewards;
- fabric and subfabric containment;
- node ownership and inherited ownership resolution;
- cross-boundary utility interfaces;
- optional cost center and profit center attribution on nodes and edges;
- evidence and provenance fields for every discovered or accepted fact;
- schema versioning and compatibility metadata.
Done when:
- schemas or contract documents describe the vNext shape;
- existing canonical node/edge concepts are mapped to the new model or marked
for retirement;
- unresolved ownership and ambiguous containment have explicit representation;
- examples cover the current single Railiance fabric, a tenant subfabric, and a
cross-boundary utility edge.
## T03 - Refactor Core Validation And Registry Materialization
```task
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0017-T03
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "7ff1c162-f778-4ab4-9e09-a512a54b2f68"
```
Update validation and registry materialization around the new contract.
Requirements:
- enforce resolvable ownership for graph nodes;
- distinguish containment, ownership, accounting attribution, and diagnostic
views;
- support fabric and subfabric membership without treating environments as
fabrics;
- represent cross-boundary utility edges as first-class accepted graph edges;
- retain evidence/provenance and confidence/review state;
- keep old graph data readable long enough for migration or controlled reset.
Done when:
- model classes, validators, registry materialization, and tests support the
new contract;
- invalid missing-owner cases fail or are flagged according to the contract;
- existing snapshot/export code can emit the vNext model.
## T04 - Update The State Hub Export Contract
```task
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0017-T04
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "d10f120d-746d-468d-b208-d946b54c2707"
```
Revise the State Hub export payload so State Hub can import the improved Fabric
model as a read model.
Requirements:
- include fabric/subfabric identity and containment;
- include owner actor identity and owner role;
- include accounting attribution fields when present;
- include cross-boundary utility metadata;
- include schema/export version metadata;
- preserve enough current canonical fields for compatibility where practical;
- document required State Hub changes for `STATE-WP-0051`.
Done when:
- export schema and sample payloads are updated;
- current State Hub import limitations are documented;
- compatibility tests cover both old baseline import behavior and the new
vNext export behavior, or intentionally document a controlled breaking reset.
## T05 - Seed The Current Railiance Netkingdom Baseline
```task
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0017-T05
status: todo
priority: medium
state_hub_task_id: "b8430050-94a8-43f6-9b3c-7928c5c6bb69"
```
Create the initial accepted model for the current Railiance responsibility
boundary.
Requirements:
- one root Railiance netkingdom;
- current king actor;
- current lord/fabric boundary reflecting that one actor pays for the current
infrastructure;
- initial default ownership rules for discovered nodes;
- placeholders for future tenant/subfabric modeling;
- no security-zone terminology in the core model.
Done when:
- the current graph can resolve ownership for all accepted nodes;
- the baseline explains why there is currently one effective fabric;
- future tenant subfabrics can be added without changing the root fabric
definition.
## T06 - Update Documentation, Fixtures, And Operator Guidance
```task
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0017-T06
status: todo
priority: medium
state_hub_task_id: "93a8a79e-877f-48c1-888e-0fb50c8de75b"
```
Bring docs and fixtures in line with the reset model.
Requirements:
- update README and affected architecture/registry/export docs;
- document the migration from repo-owned declarations to accountability-root
discovery;
- update sample graph exports and validation fixtures;
- document the handoff to State Hub and to the discovery/update-loop workplan;
- keep `docs/FabricDiscoveryAndUpdate.md` as the architecture anchor.
Done when:
- docs no longer present repo-owned external declarations as the default source
of truth;
- tests and examples exercise king/lord/tenant, ownership, fabric/subfabric,
cost/profit attribution, and cross-boundary utility edges;
- operator guidance explains how to refresh State Hub after a reset export.
## Acceptance
- Fabric has a documented vNext contract aligned with
`docs/FabricDiscoveryAndUpdate.md`.
- Every accepted graph node has resolvable ownership.
- Fabric and subfabric membership is distinct from environments, deployment
scenarios, and views.
- Cross-boundary utility interfaces are first-class graph edges.
- Cost/profit centers are optional accounting attributions and view dimensions.
- The State Hub export schema is updated or a controlled reset path is
documented.
- Existing tests are updated or replaced with coverage for the new model.

213
workplans/RAIL-FAB-WP-0018-accountability-root-discovery-update-loop.md Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,213 @@
---
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0018
type: workplan
title: "Accountability Root Discovery And Update Loop"
domain: railiance
repo: railiance-fabric
status: ready
owner: codex
topic_slug: railiance
created: "2026-05-23"
updated: "2026-05-23"
state_hub_workstream_id: "651185b5-83fe-4aef-b29d-617b2bc48c7a"
---
# RAIL-FAB-WP-0018 - Accountability Root Discovery And Update Loop
## Goal
Build the discovery and update mechanism that keeps Fabric current from durable
accountability roots and deployment automation, rather than from repo-owned
external relation declarations.
This workplan depends on the semantic direction from
`RAIL-FAB-WP-0017-financial-fabric-model-reset.md`.
## Background
Fabric should be able to rebuild the Railiance graph from scratch by starting
with the netkingdom, king/lord/tenant actors, fabric/subfabric boundaries,
State Hub attached repositories, Gitea URLs, deployment automation, service
configuration, infrastructure manifests, secret/backup evidence, and endpoint
contracts.
The update loop must stay below live telemetry. It should track durable
configuration and automation changes that alter topology, ownership, deployment,
interfaces, or cross-boundary utility.
## T01 - Define Discovery Root Manifest
```task
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0018-T01
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "38ae49fb-ce21-489c-ba67-7f76ab4febc9"
```
Define a manifest format for accountability-root discovery.
The manifest should be able to register:
- netkingdom root;
- king, lord, and tenant actors;
- fabric and subfabric boundaries;
- State Hub attached repo inventory roots;
- Gitea organization or repository roots;
- deployment automation roots;
- known host paths;
- infrastructure, backup, recovery, and secret-root evidence sources;
- refresh cadence or trigger hints.
Done when:
- manifest schema and examples exist;
- the current Railiance one-fabric baseline can be represented;
- the format can add future tenant subfabrics without changing the top-level
fabric criterion.
## T02 - Implement Durable Evidence Discovery Adapters
```task
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0018-T02
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "09246f06-10db-4c6c-9cb3-f2808fdbaa38"
```
Implement or adapt scanners for durable evidence sources.
Initial adapters should cover:
- State Hub attached repositories and host paths;
- local/Gitea repository identity;
- Dockerfiles and Compose files;
- Kubernetes, systemd, reverse proxy, and service config where present;
- deployment scripts and CI/CD references;
- API specs and endpoint contracts;
- backup, recovery, and secret-management evidence where safely discoverable.
Done when:
- each adapter emits provenance-rich raw evidence;
- evidence distinguishes durable existence/configuration from live operational
state;
- adapters can run against the current local Railiance workspace.
## T03 - Build Evidence Store And Identity Normalization
```task
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0018-T03
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "2a79938f-13e2-41b4-b692-74420d31bec4"
```
Persist discovery output and normalize identities before graph promotion.
Requirements:
- scanner run metadata;
- source paths, URLs, timestamps, scanner versions, and content hashes;
- stable identity candidates for repos, deployables, services, machines,
endpoints, fabrics, subfabrics, and actors;
- duplicate/ambiguous identity detection;
- candidate graph generation separate from accepted graph snapshots.
Done when:
- raw evidence can be inspected independently from accepted graph state;
- identity normalization produces reviewable candidates;
- repeated scans produce deterministic identities for unchanged sources.
## T04 - Add Ownership Resolution And Review Flow
```task
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0018-T04
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "670be2c2-6bec-4534-ae6a-ab0186ce0a8d"
```
Resolve ownership for discovered nodes and flag gaps.
Requirements:
- inherit owner from containing fabric/subfabric when evidence is sufficient;
- support explicit owner evidence from manifests or deployment automation;
- flag nodes with unresolved ownership;
- flag ambiguous fabric/subfabric containment;
- expose review/accept operations for candidates;
- preserve reviewer decisions across rescans when evidence identity is stable.
Done when:
- no accepted node can silently lack ownership;
- unresolved or ambiguous nodes are visible before promotion;
- review decisions survive ordinary rescans.
## T05 - Implement Snapshot Deltas And Freshness Triggers
```task
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0018-T05
status: todo
priority: medium
state_hub_task_id: "c2f28b34-de32-4090-8782-5d00541b9018"
```
Add an update loop that detects meaningful Fabric changes.
Triggers should include:
- deployment automation changes;
- infrastructure manifest changes;
- State Hub attached repository inventory changes;
- repository changes affecting deployables, APIs, service names, ports,
endpoint contracts, images, or deployment configuration;
- lord, tenant, cost/profit center, backup, recovery, or secret-root changes;
- manual operator rebuilds;
- scheduled periodic rescans.
Done when:
- scanner runs can compare against the previous accepted snapshot;
- deltas distinguish added/changed/removed nodes and edges;
- ownership, containment, accounting attribution, and cross-boundary utility
changes are highlighted;
- unchanged sources are not needlessly promoted.
## T06 - Bootstrap The Current Railiance Rebuild
```task
id: RAIL-FAB-WP-0018-T06
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "0d05ee40-0823-473f-9c87-0ed964e8900c"
```
Run the new discovery/update loop against the current Railiance workspace.
Requirements:
- rebuild from the accountability root manifest;
- produce a reviewable candidate graph;
- accept the baseline into a versioned Fabric snapshot;
- export the snapshot for State Hub;
- document unresolved gaps as follow-up workplans rather than hiding them.
Done when:
- the current Railiance graph can be rebuilt from durable roots;
- ownership is resolved or explicitly flagged for every node;
- State Hub can import the resulting export after `STATE-WP-0051`;
- operator docs explain how to rerun the rebuild and update loop.
## Acceptance
- Fabric discovery starts from accountability roots and deployment automation.
- Raw evidence, candidate graph state, and accepted graph snapshots are
separated.
- The update loop detects durable topology, ownership, deployment, interface,
and cross-boundary utility changes.
- Live telemetry remains out of scope.
- The current Railiance baseline can be rebuilt from scratch and exported.