Route all new Shin-brothers requests through Bjorn for a month, in writing, with technical direction staying with the asking manager

Situation

Nathan asked how much CIQ could use Mike and Scott on work outside Core42 - specifically the RLC-H 10.2 lockdown RPMs and updating the STIG and CIS guidelines to match EL10 - because Jason is committed to CVE automation and Oleg is a month or more from starting. Peter did not know the contract limits, said so, said he would find out, and came back with the answer. He then set the interface: for the next month, new requests to the Shin brothers go through Bjorn. Nathan writes a one-page brief on what he wants done and sends it to Bjorn with Peter copied for visibility, and Bjorn makes the ask so that the work happens at Nathan direction. If request volume grows, Peter said they would probably build a pipeline or agreement to short-circuit the routing so managers could go straight to them. On Core42 work specifically, Peter told Nathan to assume they are full time working for CIQ if needed. Nathan accepted and said he would get a one-pager written.

Reasoning

The Shin brothers relationship sits with Bjorn while the Core42 arrangement is still being negotiated, so Peter routes the asks through the one person who holds it rather than letting several engineering managers open separate channels into a partner. What he deliberately did not route is the technical direction - Bjorn makes the ask, Nathan drives the work - which keeps the engineering judgment where the engineering knowledge is. The written one-pager is the actual mechanism: it forces Nathan to scope the request before making it, gives Bjorn something he can hand over without translating, and leaves a record of what was asked for. Both the for-the-next-month and the if-there-are-multiple-requests clauses are deliberately provisional - Peter is naming the present constraint rather than building permanent process for a volume that may never materialise. And rather than guess at what the contract allowed, he went and found out.

Additional Context

The gap being filled is real: the ansible Lockdown playbook work done for 9.8 needs repeating for 10.2, with STIG and CIS guidelines updated to EL10, and Nathan judged that Mike and Scott do that work in their sleep. Bjorn was separately planning to talk to Michael Shinn that week about Core42 readiness.

Observed Evidence

Direct quotes from Peter in a Slack DM with Nathan on Sep 14. The sequence is visible in the thread: Nathan asks the capacity question, Peter says he does not know but will find out and asks for an hour, Peter returns with the Core42 answer (assume full time if needed), then sets the routing rule, then corrects Nathan assumption that he should ask Bjorn himself by specifying the brief-to-Bjorn-with-Peter-copied mechanism and the at-your-direction clause.

Confidence Breakdown

Reasoning Depth Analysis