TOP/PDT: a toolkit for the development of communication protocols

Albertengo, Guido; Forno, S.; Fumagalli, Andrea

doi:10.1109/49.62861

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several Formal Description Techniques (FDT), like LOTOS [20], Estelle [21], and SDL [22], have been developed to specify protocol behavior formally. Much research has been conducted in automatically generating protocol implementations from these FDTs [13], [14], [15], [41]. However, the protocol implementations generated by these means are generally in the form of skeletons which must be filled in by programmer code [19].…”

Section: Separation Of Local and Remote Communication Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This paper describes Cicero, a set of language constructs designed to meet these challenges. This language differs in significant ways in its goals and approach from existing declarative protocol specification languages [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]. In particular, Cicero specifications are constructive, so that programmers may directly control protocol execution.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Testing and debugging can be time consuming, especially for complex protocols. The alternative approach is to generate protocol implementations from protocol specifications, or to interpret specifications directly [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]. This approach also offers programmers tools to construct correct protocol implementations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Constructive protocol specification using Cicero

Huang

Ravishankar

1998

IIEEE Trans. Software Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New protocols are often useful, but are hard to implement well. Protocol synthesis is a solution, but synthesized protocols can be slow. Implementing protocols will be even more challenging in the future, since we expect that more advanced communication functionality will be moved from applications into protocol implementations to reduce application development effort. This trend can be seen from the recent enhancements of RPC to include semantics for supporting group communication, transactions, fault-tolerance, etc.[1], [2], [3], [4]. Protocol developers will also be challenged to provide correct and efficient protocol implementations that manage numerous concurrent I/O channels, and to increase protocol throughput to meet real-time requirements. These requirements demand better language support to facilitate precise control of multiple-thread interactions, and aggressive exploitation of parallelism in protocol execution. Protocol synthesis is also required for dynamic creation of protocol adapters in heterogeneous environments [5], [6]. This paper describes Cicero, a set of language constructs to allow constructive protocol specifications. Unlike other protocol specification languages, Cicero gives programmers explicit control over protocol execution, and facilitates both sequential and parallel implementations, especially for protocols above the transport-layer. It is intended to be used in conjunction with domain-specific libraries, and is quite different in philosophy and mode of use from existing protocol specification languages. A feature of Cicero is the use of event patterns [7] to control synchrony, asynchrony, and concurrency in protocol execution, which helps programmers build robust protocol implementations. Event-pattern driven execution also enables implementors to exploit parallelism of varying grains in protocol execution. Event patterns can also be translated into other formal models, so that existing verification techniques may be used.

show abstract

Section: Separation Of Local and Remote Communication Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Constructive protocol specification using Cicero

Huang

Ravishankar

1998

IIEEE Trans. Software Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In cases (1), (3) and (4) A visible (compound) transition is always measurable. Its service time can be estimated by measuring its response time.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

On Transition Time Testing based on Extended Finite State Machines

Zhang

Chanson

1995

Protocol Test Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A number of methods have been developed to evaluate communication protocol performance based on formal specifications. Most of them assume the specifications are given in the form of Extended Finite State Machines (EFSM). The service times of the transitions are key parameters in the performance analysis and are often assumed to be known apriori. This paper presents a methodology to estimate transition service times by testing the protocol implementation as a black box. An approach to deriving test sequences for transition testing is also proposed.

show abstract