From 11076dd1cb561daebfaeb022d96912de10dd2894 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "david.yapfest.club" Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 15:21:02 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] =?UTF-8?q?Park=20agent-native=20IPC/sharing/introspection?= =?UTF-8?q?=20exploration=20(work=20item,=20PARKED);=20adopt=20five=20D-01?= =?UTF-8?q?1=20boundary=20constraints=20as=20packet=20addendum=20(operator?= =?UTF-8?q?-directed,=20negative=20constraints=20only=20=E2=80=94=20no=20n?= =?UTF-8?q?ew=20laws,=20no=20qualification=20claim;=20positive=20laws=20de?= =?UTF-8?q?ferred=20to=20future=20D-016).=20Grounded=20in=20verified=20pri?= =?UTF-8?q?or=20art=20(kernel=20+=20runtime=20families),=20executed=20expe?= =?UTF-8?q?riments=20E1=20(channel=20carriage=20composition,=2011/11)=20an?= =?UTF-8?q?d=20E2=20(semantic=20reclamation=20safety,=200=20vs=2013=20viol?= =?UTF-8?q?ations),=20with=20corrected=20counterarguments.?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --- ...IVE-IPC-SHARING-INTROSPECTION-WORK-ITEM.md | 107 ++++++++++++++++++ decisions/d011_v14/D-011-PACKET.md | 16 +++ 2 files changed, 123 insertions(+) create mode 100644 decisions/AGENT-NATIVE-IPC-SHARING-INTROSPECTION-WORK-ITEM.md diff --git a/decisions/AGENT-NATIVE-IPC-SHARING-INTROSPECTION-WORK-ITEM.md b/decisions/AGENT-NATIVE-IPC-SHARING-INTROSPECTION-WORK-ITEM.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..a73d381c36 --- /dev/null +++ b/decisions/AGENT-NATIVE-IPC-SHARING-INTROSPECTION-WORK-ITEM.md @@ -0,0 +1,107 @@ +# Agent-native IPC, shared resources, and runtime introspection — parked exploration work item + +## Status and placement + +**Status: `PARKED` (exploration complete; positive laws deferred).** This work item +records a completed, verified exploration (2026-09-11) whose purpose was to influence +D-011's boundary language without expanding D-011's scope. Its five boundary +constraints are adopted by the D-011 packet's dated boundary-constraint addendum. +The positive laws are sketched for a future **D-016** (registered DEFERRED at the +operator's direction, like D-013–D-015). This work item gates nothing further until +D-016 is opened. + +## Question explored + +If persistent, autonomous, delegating, self-inspecting agents were first-class +computer users, what should communication, shared state, memory ownership, and +runtime visibility look like designed from first principles — and which parts of +that are genuine semantic requirements versus implementation mechanisms versus +reinventions of working prior art? + +## Method + +Two external prior-art investigations (kernel/OS family: seL4/L4, Mach/Accent, +Fuchsia/Zircon, KeyKOS/EROS/Coyotos, exokernels/Nemesis/SPIN/VINO, DTrace/eBPF, +Apertos; language-runtime family: Erlang, Rust, Orleans, Akka, CAS/Git, STM, MVCC, +CRDTs, Linda, RDMA/CHERI-protected NICs), an operator-blessed citation-verification +protocol (mechanical link check 68/85 resolve; parent content verification of +load-bearing claims; zero fabricated URLs; three quote-level defects caught and +corrected — including a misrepresented source, dropped), a parent semantic skeleton +mapping every idea onto settled D-001–D-010 doctrine, and two executed pure +experiments. Full verification table, researcher matrices, and experiment scripts +are retained in the originating session ledger +(`09td0w-state/d011-direct-execution/`: `EXPLORATION-SYNTHESIS.md`, +`verification-citations-20260911.md`, `experiment_e1_channel_carriage.py`, +`experiment_e2_semantic_reclamation.py`). + +## Findings (summary) + +1. **Most hypothesized semantics are already latent in settled doctrine or are + mechanisms that must stay beneath the algebra** (D-013 territory). +2. **Two genuinely-open semantic cores.** (a) *Authority-bearing carriage*: a + delivery is content (inline value / Resource reference) plus optional authority + attachments (attenuated Capabilities) — prior art uniformly types capabilities in + messages as separate slots, never payload; experiment E1 (11/11) shows the + authority semantics are derivable D-003 × D-010 composition (live-grant-at- + delivery, attenuation-at-delivery, revocation-racing-delivery refused with + ancestry propagation, share/copy mechanism-neutrality, adversarial paths fail + closed); the open residue is the formal carriage algebra plus the anti-smuggling + rule (authority never arrives embedded in content). (b) *Governed projections of + runtime state*: prior art refutes "free projection" across every family — + enforcement state is deliberately non-introspectable, because "who holds + authority over X" is what confinement must not leak; the defensible invariant is + capability-governed, disclosure-aware, never-ambient introspection over one + authoritative enforcement model, with machine-enforced facts strictly separated + from advisory annotations. +3. **Reclamation is a derived application:** experiment E2 (24 cases) shows semantic + safety constraints eliminate the violations LRU commits (0 vs 13) while LRU wins + utility 24/24 — the correct factored form is semantic-rules-define-what-is-safe, + policy-chooses-among-safe. Caution: reconstructibility is recursive (derivation + sources are themselves reclaimable); the closure must be proven, not assumed. +4. **Strongest surviving counterargument (named D-016 evidence obligation):** no + prior system demonstrates the conjunction persistence × capability × attenuation + × revocation over immutable revisions. KeyKOS is closest (checkpoint-mutable); + seL4 revocation is subtree-coarse with a kernel-internal derivation tree; EROS + halted on intrinsic synchronous-IPC security issues; Zircon has no revocation. + "Cheap immutable sharing with global ancestry revocation across durable + revisions" is explicitly unproven. + +## D-011 boundary constraints (adopted by packet addendum, 2026-09-11) + +1. Channel delivery does not semantically require serialization, copying, or a particular transport. +2. Resource identity/reference is stable and not process-address-space-relative, and may be carried through Channels under Capability governance. +3. Pages, mappings, DMA, address spaces, etc. are not semantic ABI. +4. Copy-versus-share must not alter Resource identity or authority semantics, though locality/cost/failure/performance may differ. +5. Runtime introspection must be a governed projection of the authoritative enforcement model, not a parallel source of truth. + +## D-016 sketch (to register when opened; DEFERRED) + +**Question:** Which laws govern cross-Actor Resource views, authority-bearing +carriage, mutation coordination, and governed projections of runtime state? +**Blocks:** D-013 substrate mapping; D-014 distributed form. **Options:** derived +compositions with narrow formalizations (E1/E2-shaped evidence) vs new subordinate +concepts; governed-projection mechanism choices. **Evidence owed:** the CA-3 +conjunction demonstration; experiments E3–E5 against *competent* conventional +baselines (not strawmen); adversarial review of the carriage algebra including the +anti-smuggling rule; the reclamation-recursion closure. Reclamation is a derived +application unless it proves to need new semantics. + +## Falsifiable experiments (E1/E2 executed — PASS; E3–E5 specified, D-016-gated) + +- **E1 (executed, 11/11 PASS):** channel carriage composition — see Finding 2a. +- **E2 (executed, PASS):** semantic vs pressure reclamation — see Finding 3. +- **E3:** zero-copy backing equivalence — same revision shared N ways under share vs + copy substrates; PASS iff outcomes identical AND performance differs. +- **E4:** ownership transfer vs *competent* conventional engineering (robust shm + protocol with explicit handoff state machine and crash-recovery discipline); + PASS iff the semantic model detects 100% of a cross-crash authority-violation + corpus that the competent baseline systematically misses. +- **E5:** semantic explorer vs *competent* observability stack (eBPF attribution + + structured allocation accounting); PASS iff a metadata-only diagnostic Actor + closes a provenance gap the baseline cannot without content access. + +## Completion and invalidation + +This work item is complete as an *exploration* (PARKED). It is not a decision and +creates no doctrine. Opening D-016 supersedes it. If the D-011 packet addendum is +ever invalidated, this work item's constraint set returns to proposal status. diff --git a/decisions/d011_v14/D-011-PACKET.md b/decisions/d011_v14/D-011-PACKET.md index 1c6a8da1bb..56cb6c5ff4 100644 --- a/decisions/d011_v14/D-011-PACKET.md +++ b/decisions/d011_v14/D-011-PACKET.md @@ -259,6 +259,22 @@ Nothing else drifted. **Bounds unchanged.** This addendum makes no qualification claim, no M3–M5 completion claim, and no selector or doctrine change. The deferred gate above (no full-catalogue PROBE admission/reconstruction, no complete 377,595 routing predictions/catalogue/index, plan-002 not completed) and the honest final boundary remain in force. +## Boundary-constraint addendum: communication, sharing, introspection (2026-09-11) + +*Appended at the operator's direction after the parked agent-native IPC/sharing/ +introspection exploration (work item: +`decisions/AGENT-NATIVE-IPC-SHARING-INTROSPECTION-WORK-ITEM.md`; session synthesis +with verified prior-art record and executed experiments E1/E2). These constraints +govern the D-011 ABI derivation negatively — they forbid inherited assumptions; they +create no new laws, no qualification claim, and no scope change. Positive laws for +sharing/views/carriage/projections belong to a future D-016.* + +1. Channel delivery does not semantically require serialization, copying, or a particular transport. +2. Resource identity/reference is stable and not process-address-space-relative, and may be carried through Channels under Capability governance. +3. Pages, mappings, DMA, address spaces, etc. are not semantic ABI. +4. Copy-versus-share must not alter Resource identity or authority semantics, though locality/cost/failure/performance may differ. +5. Runtime introspection must be a governed projection of the authoritative enforcement model, not a parallel source of truth. + -- 2.54.0