DongHyeonkaandClaude Opus 5
b2963105a8
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>
2.2 KiB
kind, slug, title, topic, project, status, sourceRevision, rootTreeNode, evidenceCapturedOn, assets, evidence, source, module
| kind | slug | title | topic | project | status | sourceRevision | rootTreeNode | evidenceCapturedOn | assets | evidence | source | module | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CONCEPT | shared-contract-c04 | digest는 고정하지만 validator 상호운용은 증명하지 않는다 | schema-and-wire-models | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:shared-contract-c04 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
shared-contract |
digest는 고정하지만 validator 상호운용은 증명하지 않는다
contracts/messaging/envelope/v1.schema.json은 Draft 2020-12 schema resource이며 envelopeVersion/eventId/contractId/payloadVersion/logicalDestination/aggregate/occurredAt/correlationId/contentType/payload를 required로 고정하고 top-level/aggregate에 unevaluatedProperties:false를 둔다. checked-in SHA-256은 bf6f2e13fafe01b8ef4cbb73d7ba3f5703bfc68d145bdfe43190bf606dbd00b1이다.
본문
contracts/messaging/envelope/v1.schema.json은 Draft 2020-12 schema resource이며 envelopeVersion/eventId/contractId/payloadVersion/logicalDestination/aggregate/occurredAt/correlationId/contentType/payload를 required로 고정하고 top-level/aggregate에 unevaluatedProperties:false를 둔다. checked-in SHA-256은 bf6f2e13fafe01b8ef4cbb73d7ba3f5703bfc68d145bdfe43190bf606dbd00b1이다.
MessagingEnvelopeSchemaResourceTest 참조 위치
:::evidence key="shared-contract-c04" alt="코드베이스에서 MessagingEnvelopeSchemaResourceTest 를 검색한 출력 2줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="MessagingEnvelopeSchemaResourceTest 코드베이스 검색 — 2줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::
테스트가 JDK API로 확인하는 것
schema text 자체, identifier regex parity, Java int/long 경계 vector, strict UTF-8, exact digest.
그것이 증명하지 않는 것
resource drift와 digest mismatch는 강하게 막지만, README가 명시하듯 실제 Draft 2020-12 validator interoperability나 broker runtime discovery는 증명하지 않는다.