기록 84편을 계약 에이전트로 다시 썼다. 기존 71편(kss 25 · virt 46)과, 계약에만
있고 안 쓰여 있던 새 글감 13편이다. 원장 84개를 열어 단계마다 스킬 영수증과 관문
종료 코드를 적었고 verify-pipeline-run.py 가 error 0 으로 닫는다.
SSOT 결함 둘을 고쳤다.
- kss 의 `약 58일` 이 반입 중 `약 59일` 로 바뀌어 있었다. 원 증거 파일이
「남은 일수: 88일 … 실제 갱신까지 약 58일」로 산수를 직접 적는다. D-4a 쪽
`약 59일` 은 강제 갱신 뒤(`VALID: 89 days`)라 맞는 값이라 그대로 뒀다.
- virt §198 의 `11.6GB` 는 §178 의 원 측정 `Mem: 11648`(MiB)과 어긋나는데
원 가이드의 표기 그대로라 고치지 않고 쓰이는 자리에 대조를 적었다.
기록의 수치 오류 셋을 고쳤다 — CASE 요약의 「게스트 셋에 8240MB」(5120+3120 은
둘이다), k3s 편이 같은 것을 여섯·일곱·여덟로 세던 것, no-docker 편의 「셋을 더
든다」(§281 의 표는 네 행이고 디스크 행이 빠져 있었다).
계약을 셋 고쳤다.
- kss 의 sourceRepository 리비전이 cdac9b8 이었는데 그 커밋에는 docs/guides/**
28개가 아예 없다. 9465582b 로 바꾸고, 반입한 바이트가 어느 커밋과도 같지 않다는
것을 측정값과 함께 적었다 — 반입은 커밋이 아니라 그 시점의 작업 트리에서 떠 온
것이다(kss 297/306 · virt 12/14 가 작업 트리와 같고, 200 커밋을 거슬러 전수
대조했을 때 가장 가까운 커밋도 28개가 어긋났다).
- virt 계약이 「2026-09-11 재배분」이라고 적는데 SSOT 는 재배분 날짜를 적지 않고
재배분 뒤 값은 이미 2026-09-10 측정에 찍혀 있다.
- kss 후보 대장이 지나친 절 아홉에 처분을 적었다(warn 9 → 0). 새 글감은 0건이고
넷은 앵커가 h3 슬러그의 접두가 아니라 중간 토막이라 검사기가 못 본 것이었다.
style_profile.mjs 의 결함 둘을 고쳤다 — frontmatter 가 문장으로 세어져
(실측 398자짜리 「문장」 하나) 평균 길이를 기준 안으로 밀어 올리고 있었고,
engPerSent 의 분자는 목록을 포함한 글에서, 분모는 목록을 걷어낸 글에서 세고
있었다(Question 기록에서 11.94 → 3.86).
verify-pipeline.py 전 항목 PASS · error 0 · unittest 334건 OK.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Replaces the to-do list with the work itself. Eight layers, 42 concepts,
1200 lines, each with what it is, why it turns up here, how it fails, and
the command to check it.
Most values were read off the running system rather than recalled:
conntrack ESTABLISHED timeout 86400s — why A-1's injection sat unmatched
for 25 minutes was normal, not a fault
FORWARD chain position 1 KUBE-ROUTER-FORWARD — why -I FORWARD 1
counted zero packets
cgroup version v2, and the numbers in systemctl status
are read straight out of those files
nginx restart policy on-failure, 100ms, and it gives up after
5 failures in 10 seconds
Type and KillMode five units on this host, four different
combinations
Two facts could not be read locally and carry sources: Let's Encrypt
backdates notBefore by exactly one hour to tolerate client clock skew, and
Keycloak invalidates the whole SSO session on refresh token reuse. The
second one explains B-3 — the winning request's new token was not itself
rejected, the session it belonged to had just been deleted.
The systemd layer also explains the one CGroup line in systemctl status that
D-4 spent ps commands establishing: master 585 kept, worker replaced.
One item is marked as read rather than measured. Restart=on-failure comes
from the unit file; nginx has not been killed to watch it come back.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
주제 13개 · Case 28 · Concept 5 · Reference 15 · Question 4 · Decision 4.
계약의 노드마다 종류가 요구하는 칸을 채우고, 본문이 있는 두 종류에는 SSOT 가 이미
그려 둔 도식 셋(value-boundaries · decision-path-404 · topic-variant-model)을
tech-log-studio/ 로 옮겨 붙였다. 새로 그린 그림은 없다.
검사 셋 전부 통과한다.
check_body.mjs 56 편 중 본문이 있는 33 편 PASS
check_prose.mjs 56 편 error 0
check_evidence.mjs --repo 포함 문제 없음
verify-tech-log-tree.py 프로젝트 5 · error 0 · warn 0
인용한 코드블록은 전부 SSOT 에서 찾아 대조했다. check_evidence.mjs 가 본문의 각 줄과
source 앵커와 계약 제목을 다시 확인한다.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The lab wrote 26 experiments on top of names it never defined. Comparing the
terms used against the places that actually explain them: 24 have no
explanation anywhere. conntrack appears 35 times across the experiment
documents, refresh token rotation 17, JWKS and Liquibase 11 each.
The list groups them in eight layers with, for each, where it came up,
whether it is explained centrally, only inside one experiment, or nowhere,
and what specifically needs to be learned. It is mapped onto the six topics
of the decomposition contract rather than standing beside it — two glam of
operations-that-report-success cannot be written without systemd, and
Restart=, journald and Type=forking are all in the "nowhere" column.
The bottom layer is the worst of it. systemctl has been typed eight times
as a command and never explained, and the unit file, cgroup, restart policy
and crash-loop limit under it are unwritten.
Building the list turned up a piece of evidence the lab missed. B-7 recorded
that it narrowed the 502 by splitting layers and calling traefik directly to
bypass nginx. The host nginx journal had already written the cause in a
sentence — "upstream sent too big header ... /oauth2/callback" — and none of
the 147 evidence files contain it. That is what journald being in the
"nowhere" column cost.
Also fixes ten spatial-metaphor errors the tightened check_prose now
catches, nine of which predate this section.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
keycloak-session-store 와 TechLog 는 SSOT 만 있고 분해 계약이 없었다. 두 프로젝트
모두 후보를 처분과 함께 남기고 PROMOTE 만 주제로 올린다.
keycloak-session-store 주제 6 · 글감 33 · 후보 42 (제외 9)
TechLog 주제 13 · 글감 56 · 후보 91 (제외 35)
TechLog 는 저장소가 셋이라 sourceRepository 를 목록으로 적는다. 설계 패키지는 이
기계에 체크아웃이 없고 반입한 쪽의 MANIFEST.sha256 이 세 계약의 원본 리비전을
고정하므로 그것을 리비전으로 적었다. 검사기 둘이 그 모양을 읽게 고친다 —
verify-tech-log-tree.py 는 목록의 항목마다 path·revision·verified 를 보고,
check_evidence.mjs 는 체크아웃이면 git 으로, 매니페스트면 그 파일이 리비전을
적고 있는지로 대조한다.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
- 계약 채택 — 독자 질문, 후보 29건(PROMOTE 24 · MERGE_INTO 4 · KEEP_IN_SSOT 1). 게시 중
17건은 전부 유지. 저장소 keycloak-pattern 은 패턴 넷이 브랜치로 갈라져 있어 revisions 로
tip 넷을 적었다. keycloak-session-store 는 같은 저장소 @ cdac9b8
- 게시된 기록의 redirect_uri 가 SSOT·코드와 달랐다 — OAuth2callback.html → callback.html
(frontend/src/app.js 에서 확인). 계약 title 이 기록과 다른 7건도 기록 쪽으로 맞췄다
- 미작성 1건 작성 — 패턴 검증을 실제로 돌릴 때의 안전한 순서(Reference)
- 리뷰 100건 반영 — 설명 뒤에 붙은 평가·차례 예고·독자 오해 가정·작성 지시를 지웠다.
삭제가 남긴 조각 4건을 고치고, 원래부터 잘려 있던 로컬 미리보기 라벨 1건도 닫았다
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The originating repository's SVGs were drawn by hand and every one of them
put a title, a subtitle and an explanation band inside the canvas. This
repository forbids both, so they could not be carried over — the whole set
was rebuilt through the skill's pipeline instead.
Each diagram went through prepare, references, prompt, a VizSpec 1.1 citing
document line ranges, lint, and render. All 28 pass lint and produce the
same eight formats the existing keycloak project has. Sentences moved out of
the canvas into <desc> and the paragraph beside each figure; the drawings
carry names only.
Two lint rules did real work rather than formatting work:
edge-through-node caught arrows crossing an unrelated
node and implying an adjacency that
does not exist — four diagrams had to
be restructured, not just relaid out
evidence-outside-prepared-context caught a diagram citing another
section; its anchor moved from B-0 to
B-1 so all three sections it draws on
are inside the prepared context
lab-topology also had to change profile: its context offers a different
candidate set, and query-fanout with shard roles is what the section
actually shows — one entry point spreading to two Keycloak nodes.
The document now carries all 28 inline, one per claim that needed one, and
the section recording what was still missing is updated: the diagram gap is
closed, Studio records remain.
verify-pipeline.py passes. audit-records.py reports no issues.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The keycloak project ended with four open questions that design could not
settle. A two-VM lab was built to answer them by measurement, and this is
that material: 26 experiments, 125 raw command outputs, 22 browser captures.
Follows the import procedure in README.md.
source/ the originating repository verbatim — 78 documents, 28 SVGs,
8 manifests, plus .source-revision recording the commit
final/ the SSOT
document.md 729 lines written from the 29 experiment documents, not
concatenated: what was predicted, what was measured, and
where the measurement itself was wrong
evidence/raw 125 outputs, flattened to <experiment>__<file> because
the originals collided (01-baseline.txt appeared three
times) and the audit only globs the top level
evidence/meta one per raw file; command and exitCode are null and the
README says why rather than inventing them
evidence/browser 22 captures
assets/ three diagrams through techviz
.techviz/ their VizSpecs
A separate project rather than an addition to keycloak: the B-layer answers
that project's four questions, but the A, C and D layers are about cluster
failure, SSO and operations, and one document.md should hold one subject.
The four question records there can point here through 관계.
Recorded rather than papered over: only three of the 28 diagrams were
remade. The repository forbids hand-drawn SVG and forbids titles inside the
canvas; all 28 originals carry both, so converting them is redrawing, not
reformatting. They stay in source/ and the gap is written into the document.
verify-pipeline.py passes. audit-records.py reports no issues.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
