Distributed agreement in the presence of processor and communication faults
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Automatically increasing the fault-tolerance of distributed algorithms
Journal of Algorithms
Early stopping in Byzantine agreement
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Knowledge and common knowledge in a byzantine environment: crash failures
Information and Computation
Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Early-stopping Terminating Reliable Broadcast protocol for general-omission failures
PODC '96 Proceedings of the fifteenth annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing
Fully Polynomial Byzantine Agreement for Processors in Rounds
SIAM Journal on Computing
Fault-tolerant broadcasts and related problems
Distributed systems (2nd Ed.)
Reaching Agreement in the Presence of Faults
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
The Byzantine Generals Problem
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS)
Elements of distributed computing
Elements of distributed computing
Distributed Algorithms
A simple proof of the uniform consensus synchronous lower bound
Information Processing Letters
Optimal Early Stopping in Distributed Consensus (Extended Abstract)
WDAG '92 Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Distributed Algorithms
Consensus in Synchronous Systems: A Concise Guided Tour
PRDC '02 Proceedings of the 2002 Pacific Rim International Symposium on Dependable Computing
Uniform Agreement Despite Process Omission Failures
IPDPS '03 Proceedings of the 17th International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing
Brief announcement: early decision despite general process omission failures
Proceedings of the twenty-second annual symposium on Principles of distributed computing
Fast fault-tolerant agreement algorithms
Proceedings of the twenty-fourth annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing
Adaptive timeliness of consensus in presence of crash and timing faults
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing
On the probabilistic omission adversary
SSS'07 Proceedings of the 9h international conference on Stabilization, safety, and security of distributed systems
SIROCCO'06 Proceedings of the 13th international conference on Structural Information and Communication Complexity
Replication predicates for dependent-failure algorithms
Euro-Par'05 Proceedings of the 11th international Euro-Par conference on Parallel Processing
Gracefully degrading fair exchange with security modules
EDCC'05 Proceedings of the 5th European conference on Dependable Computing
Optimal randomized fair exchange with secret shared coins
OPODIS'05 Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Principles of Distributed Systems
Secure computation with partial message loss
TCC'06 Proceedings of the Third conference on Theory of Cryptography
Early-deciding consensus is expensive
Proceedings of the 2013 ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Consensus is a central problem of fault-tolerant distributed computing that, in the context of synchronous distributed systems, has received a lot of attention in the crash failure model and in the Byzantine failure model. This paper considers synchronous distributed systems made up of n processes, where up to t can commit failures by crashing or omitting to send or receive messages when they should ("process omission" failure model). It presents a protocol solving uniform consensus in such a context. This protocol has several noteworthy features. First, it is particularly simple. Then, it is optimal both in (1) the number of communication steps needed for processes to decide and stop, namely, min(f+2,t+1) where f is the actual number of faulty processes, and (2) the number of processes that can be faulty, namely tn/2. Moreover, (3) it ensures that no process (be it correct or faulty) executes more than min(f+2,t+1) rounds, thereby extending the decision lower bound to the full completion time. The design of a uniform consensus protocol with such optimality requirements was an open problem. Interestingly, as min(f+2,t+1) is a lower bound to solve uniform consensus in the synchronous crash failure model, the proposed protocol shows that uniform consensus is not "harder'' in the omission failure model than in the crash failure model. The protocol is also message size efficient as, in addition to values, a message has to piggyback only n bits of control information.