<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>DhananjayPurohit wrote</title><author_name>DhananjayPurohit (npub1qn…d9r6h)</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.now/npub1qnw27f2jsqvn05wzpd56m7ykgmepk57p0yrzw8fzc7lfhjkmjmqqmd9r6h</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.now</provider_url><html>Explicit route set, not prefix. Each location is tagged with l402_realm &#34;name&#34;, so membership is opt in and a new route under the same tree doesn&#39;t silently join.&#xA;&#xA;Your instinct still lands though, it just moves: nothing enforces uniform pricing inside a realm, so two locations sharing a name at different prices means the cheap token opens the dear route. That&#39;s documented, but documentation isn&#39;t a guard. Filing it, likely as a startup warning rather than a hard reject, since nginx merges each location independently and a reject would break anyone already running mixed prices.&#xA;&#xA;On bearer tokens, the preimage is single use by default, claimed atomically with SET NX EX, so that&#39;s the spend counter. Realm mode requires l402_indefinite_access which turns that off by design, and there your point is exact: ExpiresAt is the only bound.&#xA;&#xA;The idempotency hit is fair and unanswered today. Pay, lose the response, retry, preimage already claimed, 401 having paid for nothing. Filing it as a discussion rather than a task though, because a retry window is a replay window: anyone positioned to observe the preimage gets the same grace. Curious how you scoped the request id, is it bound to the payer or just to the request? &#xA;&#xA;</html></oembed>