]> Independent Researcher

US douglas.dohmeyer@protonmail.com

General Independent Submission distributed synchronization pipeline execution ordered coordination protocol ChainSync is a lightweight application-layer protocol that runs over reliable TCP connections to synchronize a fixed linear chain of distributed processes such that they execute their local tasks in strict sequential order and only after every process in the chain has confirmed it is ready. The protocol has four phases: 1) a forward "readiness" wave, 2) a backward "start" wave, 3) a forward "execution" wave, and 4) a backward exit wave. The design guarantees strict ordering even when nodes become ready at very different times and requires only point-to-point TCP connections along the chain, thus no central coordinator is needed.

Introduction Many distributed workflows (pipeline parallelism in machine-learning training, staged data processing, multi-organization business processes, ordered multi-phase computation, etc.) require that tasks execute in a fixed order across different machines, yet must not begin until every participant is ready. Standard barriers do not enforce execution order. Token-passing or leader-based schemes introduce complexity and single points of failure. ChainSync solves this with a simple, fully decentralized four-wave algorithm on a line topology that guarantees: No process starts until the entire chain is ready. Execution order is strictly A -> B -> ... -> N. Clean backward-propagating exit after N finishes.

Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

Topology and Configuration The processes form a static logical chain:

B <-> C <-> ... <-> N (Tail) ]]>

Each process knows: The IP address and port of its predecessor (Head has none) The IP address and port of its successor (Tail has none) Whether it is Head, Tail, or intermediate (inferable from the presence/absence of a predecessor/successor) Each adjacent pair maintains a single persistent bidirectional TCP connection.

States State Meaning SYNC Initial state; waiting for READY from the predecessor (Head starts here but moves to READY when locally ready) READY Chain segment to the left is ready; has sent READY to the successor (if not Tail) WATCH Has propagated START leftward; waiting for COMPLETE from the predecessor (if not Head) START Currently executing its local task COMPLETE Local task finished; has sent COMPLETE to its successor

Message Types Messages are simple ASCII text lines terminated by LF. Recommended format: <COMMAND>[:<ROUND-ID>]\n Defined commands: READY[:<ROUND-ID>] START[:<ROUND-ID>] COMPLETE[:<ROUND-ID>] <ROUND-ID> is optional but RECOMMENDED (e.g., UUID) to support multiple concurrent rounds on the same connection. Implementations running only one round at a time MAY omit it.

Protocol Operation

Phase 1 -- Readiness Collection (Forward Wave) Head (A), when locally ready, moves from SYNC to READY and sends READY to its successor. Every other node starts in SYNC. When it receives READY from predecessor and becomes locally ready, it moves from SYNC to READY and sends READY to successor. When Tail (N) enters READY, Phase 2 begins automatically.

Phase 2 -- Start Trigger Propagation (Backward Wave) Tail, upon entering READY, sends START to its predecessor and moves to WATCH. An intermediate node, upon receiving START from its successor: Sends START to its predecessor Moves to WATCH and waits for COMPLETE from its predecessor Head, upon receiving START, has no predecessor and therefore moves directly to START and begins execution. This phase completes in O(n) messages and guarantees every node knows the entire chain is ready before any node starts.

Phase 3 -- Ordered Execution and Completion (Forward Wave) A node in WATCH that receives COMPLETE from its predecessor moves to START and begins execution. When a node finishes its task, it moves from START to COMPLETE and sends COMPLETE to its successor (triggers successor to start) Execution order is therefore strictly A -> B -> C -> ... -> N.

Phase 4 -- Backward Propagating Exit (Backward Wave) Tail, upon entering COMPLETE has no successor and therefore immediately sends COMPLETE to its predecessor and MAY terminate. An intermediate node in COMPLETE that receives COMPLETE from its successor sends COMPLETE to its predecessor and MAY terminate. Head, upon receiving COMPLETE from its successor MAY terminate. The completion of this phase guarantees the Head node knows all nodes have completed execution.

Waiting in WATCH State The RECOMMENDED approach is push-based: the node simply blocks on read() from the predecessor's TCP socket. When the predecessor finishes, it pushes COMPLETE. An alternative approach is to poll the predecessor's TCP socket. Both approaches are compliant.

Example Message Flow (A-B-C-D) RD: READY
ST: START
CM: COMPLETE A.....B.....C.....D
|-RD->|.....|.....| Phase 1
|.....|-RD->|.....|
|.....|.....|-RD->|
|.....|.....|<-ST-| Phase 2
|.....|<-ST-|.....|
|<-ST-|.....|.....| Phase 3
|.....|.....|.....| A starts immediately
|-CM->|.....|.....| A finishes and B starts
|.....|-CM->|.....| B finishes and C starts
|.....|.....|-CM->| C finishes and D starts
|.....|.....|.....| Phase 4
|.....|.....|<-CM-| D finishes
|.....|<-CM-|.....X D exits
|<-CM-|.....X...... C exits
|.....X............ B exits
X.................. A exits

IANA Considerations This memo includes no request to IANA.

Security Considerations Connections SHOULD use TLS 1.3. Production deployments SHOULD use mutual TLS with certificate pinning or pre-shared keys to prevent node impersonation.

In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings.

Acknowledgements The author thanks Grok, an AI system developed by xAI, for assistance in drafting portions of this document based on provided specifications, for editing, for suggestions on the ROUND-ID mechanism for concurrent rounds, and the backward propagation of COMPLETE messages to ensure clean termination.