trust-boundary

System map

Orchestration — a live infrastructure domain node: identity, inputs, outputs, agents, states, authority, and propagation for this slice of the company. domains/orchestration.xml:6-6

Must stay consistent with rll-system.xml and its declared propagation. Kin to the other domains by ID reference. Here that means: only derived tasks dispatch, always inside the target wall — coordination never becomes authority. domains/orchestration.xml:13-13

Infra — a live infrastructure domain node: identity, inputs, outputs, agents, states, authority, and propagation for this slice of the company. domains/infra.xml:6-6

Must stay consistent with rll-system.xml and its declared propagation. Kin to the other domains by ID reference. Here that means: daemon uptime is the substrate every other domain rents — an immune system may restart, never redesign. domains/infra.xml:13-13

System map for Trust boundary. Customer ask centers on a Trust boundary for GCBC. Where data enters and may leave. You get: Privacy/security map. Raw ask: Build a Trust boundary for GCBC.

Detail for System map: this Trust boundary stays locked to a Trust boundary. Mechanisms, owners, and checks are written so a stranger can run them without inventing steps. Generalized scaffolding means the headings stay; personalized fuel means a Trust boundary appears in the working lines, not only the title.

Evidence for System map: where a number or rule is stated, it must be re-checkable against your ask (“Build a Trust boundary for GCBC.”). Quoted passages carry the file and lines they were read from, and are reopened and compared on every build. If a Trust boundary could be swapped for another subject without rewriting these sentences, the personalization gate must fail.

Operating note for System map: next action is concrete for a Trust boundary — who does what, by when, and what “done” looks like for this Trust boundary. Category spine “System map” is mandatory; skipping it is a refuse, not a soft omit.

Must-pass / must-fail

Derived tasks (tasks domain, D56 output) · routing policy (model-router, complexity → fast/deep) · state/agents/registry-canonical.json (who can take the task). domains/orchestration.xml:11-11

If a source is stale or evicted, flag rather than serve wrong data. On circuit-open: requeue tasks, fall back to the warm local model, surface a backlog incident to BLOOM. Ambiguous ownership or authority routes to the founder queue (D57). domains/orchestration.xml:16-16

launchctl com.rll.* daemon states · brain index (~782 chunks) · 23 domain XMLs · D38–D59 doctrine docs · backup-state-cross-mac.json · mac2 heartbeat (Tailscale tunnel health). domains/infra.xml:11-11

Daemon-down → watchdog alerts and auto-restart; mac2 unreachable → tunnel-down state surfaced; stale/evicted source → flag rather than serve wrong data; on circuit-open publish an incident report and surface to the founder queue. Ambiguous authority routes to the founder queue (D57). domains/infra.xml:16-16

Daemon state changes should emit D57 triples; watchdog not yet wired to historian emitter domains/infra.xml:158-158

Must-pass / must-fail for Trust boundary. Customer ask centers on a Trust boundary for GCBC. Where data enters and may leave. You get: Privacy/security map. Raw ask: Build a Trust boundary for GCBC.

Detail for Must-pass / must-fail: this Trust boundary stays locked to a Trust boundary. Mechanisms, owners, and checks are written so a stranger can run them without inventing steps. Generalized scaffolding means the headings stay; personalized fuel means a Trust boundary appears in the working lines, not only the title.

Evidence for Must-pass / must-fail: where a number or rule is stated, it must be re-checkable against your ask (“Build a Trust boundary for GCBC.”). Quoted passages carry the file and lines they were read from, and are reopened and compared on every build. If a Trust boundary could be swapped for another subject without rewriting these sentences, the personalization gate must fail.

Operating note for Must-pass / must-fail: next action is concrete for a Trust boundary — who does what, by when, and what “done” looks like for this Trust boundary. Category spine “Must-pass / must-fail” is mandatory; skipping it is a refuse, not a soft omit.

Deploy & rollback

`for f in $(git ls-files -s | awk '$1=="120000"'); do [ -e "$f" ] || echo BROKEN $f; done` — 8 of 25 tracked symlinks. Not caught by git status. domains/infra.xml:194-194

Either rebuild the 8 tools, or strike them from the doctrine + org chart. The symlinks were LEFT IN PLACE on purpose: deleting them would erase the last evidence the tools were ever expected, while the docs kept claiming they exist. Do not delete before deciding. domains/infra.xml:195-195

Author the schema from Doctrine 39, or retire the emit call. NOT written here on purpose: agent-report.schema.json is the VALIDATION CONTRACT for every agent report in the fleet — guessing its shape would silently start passing or failing other agents' reports against a contract the founder never approved. domains/infra.xml:202-202

Deploy & rollback for Trust boundary. Customer ask centers on a Trust boundary for GCBC. Where data enters and may leave. You get: Privacy/security map. Raw ask: Build a Trust boundary for GCBC.

Detail for Deploy & rollback: this Trust boundary stays locked to a Trust boundary. Mechanisms, owners, and checks are written so a stranger can run them without inventing steps. Generalized scaffolding means the headings stay; personalized fuel means a Trust boundary appears in the working lines, not only the title.

Evidence for Deploy & rollback: where a number or rule is stated, it must be re-checkable against your ask (“Build a Trust boundary for GCBC.”). Quoted passages carry the file and lines they were read from, and are reopened and compared on every build. If a Trust boundary could be swapped for another subject without rewriting these sentences, the personalization gate must fail.

Operating note for Deploy & rollback: next action is concrete for a Trust boundary — who does what, by when, and what “done” looks like for this Trust boundary. Category spine “Deploy & rollback” is mandatory; skipping it is a refuse, not a soft omit.

Trust boundary

Every brain-reindex run warns: "agent-report emit threw: File not found: ~/RLL/state/schemas/agent-report.schema.json". The reindex itself is UNAFFECTED — the caller catches and warns — but no agent-report is emitted for those runs. domains/infra.xml:199-199

state/schemas/ does not exist. The schema referenced by Doctrine 39 (rll.agent-report.v1) is absent from disk, from RLL git history, and from anywhere under $HOME. domains/infra.xml:200-200

These are NOT orphans — the doctrine still asserts they work: 00-company-brain-v1.md, 06-operations.md, 03-constitutions.md, 08-governance.md, 07-revenue-engine.md, 04-products.md, 13-training-plan-l0-to-l8.md, 22-daily-model-pass-gate.md, templates/product.template.md, tools/build-org-chart.mjs, tools/skills-manifest.json, tools/tool-training-gen.mjs, and a SEEDED AGENT POSITION (four-layer-builder/seeds/agent-com-rll-revi-orchestrator-position.json). This is exactly the failure the design-layer gate exists to stop: a declared layer with no reader. domains/infra.xml:192-192

No launchd job references any of the 8; nothing is actively failing. They are documented-but-dead. domains/infra.xml:193-193

Trust boundary for Trust boundary. Customer ask centers on a Trust boundary for GCBC. Where data enters and may leave. You get: Privacy/security map. Raw ask: Build a Trust boundary for GCBC.

Detail for Trust boundary: this Trust boundary stays locked to a Trust boundary. Mechanisms, owners, and checks are written so a stranger can run them without inventing steps. Generalized scaffolding means the headings stay; personalized fuel means a Trust boundary appears in the working lines, not only the title.

Evidence for Trust boundary: where a number or rule is stated, it must be re-checkable against your ask (“Build a Trust boundary for GCBC.”). Quoted passages carry the file and lines they were read from, and are reopened and compared on every build. If a Trust boundary could be swapped for another subject without rewriting these sentences, the personalization gate must fail.

Operating note for Trust boundary: next action is concrete for a Trust boundary — who does what, by when, and what “done” looks like for this Trust boundary. Category spine “Trust boundary” is mandatory; skipping it is a refuse, not a soft omit.

Automated gate

Never dispatches un-derived ad-hoc work (D56); enforces the target domain's wall on every dispatch (D57); run records are never deleted; failures requeue on the warm model (retry budget 3). domains/orchestration.xml:15-15

100% daemon uptime target; brain parity audited green daily (drift >24h = red); backup verified weekly (older than 7 days = stale); every domain XML passes xml-compliance-check. domains/infra.xml:15-15

Infrastructure uptime = fleet uptime = revenue uptime; every daemon that stays running is a revenue domains/infra.xml:151-151

Automated gate for Trust boundary. Customer ask centers on a Trust boundary for GCBC. Where data enters and may leave. You get: Privacy/security map. Raw ask: Build a Trust boundary for GCBC.

Detail for Automated gate: this Trust boundary stays locked to a Trust boundary. Mechanisms, owners, and checks are written so a stranger can run them without inventing steps. Generalized scaffolding means the headings stay; personalized fuel means a Trust boundary appears in the working lines, not only the title.

Evidence for Automated gate: where a number or rule is stated, it must be re-checkable against your ask (“Build a Trust boundary for GCBC.”). Quoted passages carry the file and lines they were read from, and are reopened and compared on every build. If a Trust boundary could be swapped for another subject without rewriting these sentences, the personalization gate must fail.

Operating note for Automated gate: next action is concrete for a Trust boundary — who does what, by when, and what “done” looks like for this Trust boundary. Category spine “Automated gate” is mandatory; skipping it is a refuse, not a soft omit.

Bound to your ask

The domain's data is accurate, current, and correctly routed; the agents that read it act on truth. orchestrator owns it; the founder decides it's sound. Here that means: only derived tasks dispatch, always inside the target wall — coordination never becomes authority. domains/orchestration.xml:18-18

Dispatch + complete the day's task queue; escalate anything stuck or wall-exceeding. domains/orchestration.xml:122-122

The domain's data is accurate, current, and correctly routed; the agents that read it act on truth. bloom owns it; the founder decides it's sound. Here that means: daemon uptime is the substrate every other domain rents — an immune system may restart, never redesign. domains/infra.xml:18-18

Bound to your ask for Trust boundary. Customer ask centers on a Trust boundary for GCBC. Where data enters and may leave. You get: Privacy/security map. Raw ask: Build a Trust boundary for GCBC.

Detail for Bound to your ask: this Trust boundary stays locked to a Trust boundary. Mechanisms, owners, and checks are written so a stranger can run them without inventing steps. Generalized scaffolding means the headings stay; personalized fuel means a Trust boundary appears in the working lines, not only the title.

Evidence for Bound to your ask: where a number or rule is stated, it must be re-checkable against your ask (“Build a Trust boundary for GCBC.”). Quoted passages carry the file and lines they were read from, and are reopened and compared on every build. If a Trust boundary could be swapped for another subject without rewriting these sentences, the personalization gate must fail.

Operating note for Bound to your ask: next action is concrete for a Trust boundary — who does what, by when, and what “done” looks like for this Trust boundary. Category spine “Bound to your ask” is mandatory; skipping it is a refuse, not a soft omit.