The operator asked whether the Office1 NetBox apex had actually been polled. It
had not. It has now been read, and the answer inverts a claim I made one commit
ago and a question I put in front of them.

WHAT IS TRUE: the v6 literals are assigned, ratified and recorded, and have been
since 2026-07-11 under D-111 (ADOPTED). Measured from
netbox/draft/vr1-office1-current-20260725.json -- 139 prefixes, 103 IPv6, every
relevant row tagged D-101/D-111: ULA fd50:840e:74e2::/48 with DC0 planes at
:220/:221/:230/:240/:250::/64 and DC1 at :320/:321/:330/:340/:350::/64; GUA
provider-public DC0 2602:f3e2:f02:10::/64 + VIP f02:11::/64, DC1
2602:f3e2:f03:10::/64 + VIP f03:11::/64.

WHAT I GOT WRONG: the R2 ruling note claimed D-101's "Remaining open item" (the
org ULA /48 and per-DC GUA carve) had become a Stage-5 precondition because
"dual-stack cannot deploy against literals that do not exist". They exist. R2a
("which literals") is WITHDRAWN as never having been open; no operator utterance
is owed on it.

THE REAL PRECONDITION IS NARROWER AND BETTER: propagation, not assignment, and it
needs no ruling. The ratified values are absent from the two places Stage 5
actually reads -- scripts/lib-net.sh carries no v6 arm at all, and MAAS carries
no v6 on any of the 12 DC plane fabrics. Both are mechanical copies from an
authoritative source, so both move from Part A (needs a decision) to the Phase-3
mechanical batch.

Note CURRENT-STATE's "DRIFT-FREE across netbox/lib-net/artifacts" is NOT
contradicted: drift-free means values appearing in more than one place agree, not
that coverage is complete. lib-net.sh simply never gained a v6 arm.

PROCESS FAILURE, OWNED AND RECORDED IN THE DECISION ITSELF: the audit's own lens 2
listed the apex as UNMEASURED and warned, in terms, that "D-101's literals may
exist in NetBox and simply not be carved into MAAS". That warning was correct and
available, and I put a question to the operator anyway on the strength of D-101's
stale prose. Trusting stale decision prose over an available measurement is
exactly what this audit was convened to catch.

NEW DOCFIX-CLASS FINDING, logged not fixed (hard rule 1): D-101's "Remaining open
item" paragraph still reads "pending NetBox assignment (gap #3)" for literals
D-111 adopted on 2026-07-11 -- a decision's own prose contradicted by a later
ruling, DOCFIX-200/204 class, and the direct cause of this error. Queued in the
Phase-3 batch.

The R2 ruling itself STANDS -- dual-stack as ruled. Only its stated effect changed.

Revert: git revert this commit to restore the prior (incorrect) framing; the R2
ruling in the preceding commit is independent and should not be reverted with it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01HvCyrwvYTTcDYnRErfMsNf