The last C4 route. Portalling works today; route 3 removes a duplicate
placement authority (LocalPlayerTeleportPlacement.Place plus headless's
ResynchronizeLocalPlayerForPortalArrival), it does not fix a bug.
~225-400 added non-comment production lines, one slice. Every site
re-verified at HEAD by reading, not inherited from the scoping.
The authority's shape is RIGHT as-is and redesign is forbidden:
RuntimePortalPlacementAuthority's 4-tuple is exactly what transit owns per
reveal, and IsValid already cross-checks generation. Only the PRODUCER is
missing — the campaign plan's "the adapter does not exist" overstates the gap,
since consumption and validation are live production code at three layers.
The producer additionally needs no new WorldRevealCoordinator exposure: it
re-derives the host token through transit's idempotent
TryRegisterHostProjection, which makes a superseded token unobtainable by
construction.
Retail's local portal arrival is the GENERIC path for the third route running:
SmartBox::TeleportPlayer @0x00453910 is SetPositionSimple(player, dest, 1)
with flags 0x1012 — route 2's exact primitive — plus PlayerPositionUpdated.
TWO rule inversions are the contract's loudest section, because an implementer
arriving from the routes just landed will otherwise carry the wrong rule:
route 2's "never re-arm the leash" INVERTS (the teleport branch arms
ConstrainTo @0x0045418A and zeroes velocity @0x004541B4), and 4b-3's
hook-before-placement ordering INVERTS (the local teleport_hook runs AFTER
placement, from PlayerPositionUpdated @0x004538AE).
Three findings new since scoping: PlayerTeleported @0x006B32B0 byte-confirmed
as SetAutoRun(0,1) + SendMovementEvent, with the autorun-cancel gap verified
real — nothing cancels the J5.4 latch on arrival today; TryPublishPlace writes
no pose, so the committed-receipt suffix is the render entity's mover; and
headless TryCompletePortal's fully-synchronous suffix creates a
receipt-past-EndTeleport FIFO-wedge hazard, covered by proof obligation P3.
SEQUENCING BLOCKER recorded in the contract's front matter: route 7's
concurrent diff modifies five route-3 surfaces. The collision is textual, not
semantic — route 7 adds parent-cell machinery and touches neither the portal
transit, the drive controller, nor either duplicate authority — but route 3
must not start until route 7 commits, and must then re-verify its inventory by
symbol and re-measure the Release baseline.
#280 is SPLIT OUT, siding with the campaign plan's own separate sequencing
over the session handoff's "rides with route 3" claim.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
