Perfect failure detection with very few bits

Fraigniaud, Pierre; Rajsbaum, Sergio; Travers, Corentin; Kuznetsov, Petr; Rieutord, Thibault

doi:10.1016/j.ic.2020.104604

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, verification mechanisms a la proof-labeling schemes were used in other contexts, including the congested clique [27], wait-free computing [20], failure detectors [21], anonymous networks [17], and mobile computing [7,19]. For more references to work related to distributed verification, or distributed decision in general, see the survey [14].…”

Section: Previous Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Redundancy in Distributed Proofs

Feuilloley¹,

Fraigniaud²,

Hirvonen³

et al. 2018

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Distributed proofs are mechanisms enabling the nodes of a network to collectively and efficiently check the correctness of Boolean predicates on the structure of the network (e.g. having a specific diameter), or on data-structures distributed over the nodes (e.g. a spanning tree). We consider well known mechanisms consisting of two components: a prover assigning a certificate to each node, and a distributed algorithm called verifier that is in charge of verifying the distributed proof formed by the collection of all certificates. We show that many network predicates have distributed proofs offering a high level of redundancy, explicitly or implicitly. We use this remarkable property of distributed proofs for establishing perfect tradeoffs between the size of the certificate stored at every node, and the number of rounds of the verification protocol.

show abstract

Section: Previous Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Redundancy in Distributed Proofs

Feuilloley¹,

Fraigniaud²,

Hirvonen³

et al. 2018

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unlike our algorithm, the message sizes in their algorithms are unbounded. Papers [8] and [3] do failure detection using bounded sized messages, but unlike our work, they assume that the underlying communication channels are reliable. Our contribution in this paper is a little of both.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing ♢P with Bounded Messages on a Network of ADD Channels

Kumar

Welch

2019

Parallel Process. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present an implementation of the eventually perfect failure detector (♦P ) from the original hierarchy of the Chandra-Toueg [4] oracles on an arbitrary partitionable network composed of unreliable channels that can lose and reorder messages. Prior implementations of ♦P have assumed different partially synchronous models ranging from bounded point-to-point message delay and reliable communication to unbounded message size and known network topologies. We implement ♦P under very weak assumptions on an arbitrary, partitionable network composed of Average Delayed/Dropped (ADD) channels [13] to model unreliable communication. Unlike older implementations, our failure detection algorithm uses bounded-sized messages to eventually detect all nodes that are unreachable (crashed or disconnected) from it.

show abstract

Perfect failure detection with very few bits

Cited by 2 publications

References 21 publications

Redundancy in Distributed Proofs

Redundancy in Distributed Proofs

Implementing ♢P with Bounded Messages on a Network of ADD Channels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About