Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
DOI: 10.1109/hicss.1995.375494
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Connection management without retaining information

Abstract: . AbstractManaging a connection between two hosts in a network is an important service to provide in order to make the network useful for many applications. The two main subproblems are the management of serial incarnations of a connection and the transfer of messages within an incarnation. This paper investigates whether it is necessary for connection management protocols to retain state information across node crashes and between incarnations. The following results were obtained:When information is not retai… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Publication Types

Select...
2
1
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Nevertheless, EO guarantees in TCP only hold within a connection/session; when the connection fails (likely to occur in current WAN environments and long-lived communications), it either allows for message loss or duplication, as Belsnes [6] shows for any single-message communication. Attiya et al [2] proved that when state information is not saved between incarnations, the problem is solvable if and only if the network is FIFO-which is not the case for most networks. Therefore, to ensure EO, it is necessary to retain inter-connection information, e.g., at an upper layer.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, EO guarantees in TCP only hold within a connection/session; when the connection fails (likely to occur in current WAN environments and long-lived communications), it either allows for message loss or duplication, as Belsnes [6] shows for any single-message communication. Attiya et al [2] proved that when state information is not saved between incarnations, the problem is solvable if and only if the network is FIFO-which is not the case for most networks. Therefore, to ensure EO, it is necessary to retain inter-connection information, e.g., at an upper layer.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By the induction hypothesis, S would have existed until T was acquired, and as S is absent from C, this implies that T was already acquired. (2) Or T could be removed by the tokens map entry for (s, d) being overwritten in createtoken; this last case is not possible because: tokens are created using the current source clock, which is then incremented; for a token with id (s, d, sck s , ) to be created, a received counter state C from d must contain a slot (s, d, sck , ) with sck = sck s . This means that d would have previously received T from s and from the induction hypothesis, d would have had a corresponding slot and would have already acquired T filling the slot.…”
Section: Implementation and Experimental Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If an infinite duration connection incarnation is maintained for each client, where no operation can fail due to a timeout, this will imply stable server state to manage each client connection, leading to state explosion in servers, as clients cannot be forgotten. This because there is no protocol that gives reliable message transfer within an infinite incarnation for general unbounded capacity (e.g., wide-area networks) non-FIFO lossy networks that does not need stable storage between crashes [2,9]. This problem can be overcome by never failing due to a timeout, but allowing connections to be closed if there are no pending requests and the connection close handshake is performed successfully (e.g., before a partition occurs).…”
Section: The Availability Problem Of Server-side Crdtsmentioning
confidence: 99%