Independently issued authority
Artifact
Repositorynsolland/valo-service
Branchprotected/main
Environmentprod-eu-west
Routerelease-gateway-01
Window10:00–10:30 UTC
Exposure limit3 deployments
AbcadaCLV × REHT
One action. One authority. Two boundary models.
The same deployment object is evaluated for authority conformance and substantive admissibility immediately before execution. The test reveals where the two systems complement each other and where they overlap.
Execution boundary
Authority can be restricted or invalidated. It cannot be expanded by runtime context.
01
Authority envelopePENDING02
Conformance verifierPENDING03
VAIG evaluationPENDING04
REHT clearancePENDING05
RACS enforcementPENDINGLive proposed action
Artifact
Repositorynsolland/valo-service
Branchprotected/main
Environmentprod-eu-west
Route
Time10:14 UTC
Current exposure
AbcadaCLV mapping point
Receives the same authority envelope and proposed action. Paul maps the verifier's actual conformance result here.
VAIG
Evaluates conformance result, tests, review evidence, policy, risk and current state.
REHT
Determines whether the exact action receives substantive clearance under all governing inputs.
RACS
Revalidates the bound action at the gateway and enforces the final decision.
Portable test object
This is the shared input. AbcadaCLV and VALO should not rewrite it to favour their own model.
The comparison question
Does AbcadaCLV's authority-conformance decision already cover every reason REHT uses to stop the action? If not, its result can become a necessary governed input to REHT. If yes, the two products substantially overlap at this boundary.