A recursive Byzantine-resilient protocol

Cheng, Chien-Fu; Tsai, Kuo-Tang

doi:10.1016/j.jnca.2014.10.010

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the BVC problem, the agreement value is either 0 or 1. Any protocol designed to solve the BVC problem must satisfy three requirements as follows [23], [25]: BVC_Agreement: All the correct processors agree on a common value. BVC_Validity: If the initial values of all the correct processors are v, then all the correct processors shall agree on v. BVC_Termination: All the correct processors eventually decide.…”

Section: B Consensus (Binary-valued / Multi-valued)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some related works of the Consensus problem published in recent years [25], [27] are introduced as follows. The traditional Consensus protocols can tolerate (n−1)/3 faulty processors in a network after (n − 1)/3 + 1 rounds of message exchange [22], [23].…”

Section: B Consensus (Binary-valued / Multi-valued)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, the traditional Consensus protocols still need (n − 1)/3 + 1 rounds of message exchange to solve the Consensus problem even if there is no faulty processor. Hence, Cheng and Tsai [25] propose the Recursive Byzantine-Resilient (RBR) protocol to address this issue. In this paper, the authors do not address how to let the protocol tolerate a greater number of faulty processors but focus on how to drastically reduce its space complexity and time complexity by slashing the number of faulty processors that can be tolerated.…”

Section: B Consensus (Binary-valued / Multi-valued)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Flexible Consensus Protocol for Distributed Systems

Cheng

Tsai

2019

IEEE Access

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a new type of Consensus problem named the Consensus (n, m) with alternative plans, where n denotes the total number of processors in the network, m is the number of processors with an initial value, n ≥4 and 1 ≤ m ≤ n. Compared to the traditional Consensus problem, the Consensus (n, m) problem with alternative plans has two major features. First, each processor is no longer required to propose an initial value. It can flexibly choose to propose or not propose an initial value. This feature allows the Consensus problem to be flexibly applied in many new real-world applications of the distributed system. Second, the proposed protocol ensures that all correct processors always agree on a good plan from a correct processor and never on a bad plan. Compared to solutions of the traditional Consensus problem, which does not guarantee that all correct processors agree on a good plan, this feature ensures the rationality of the Consensus value. In other words, by solving the Consensus (n, m) problem with alternative plans, the fault tolerance and reliability of distributed systems can be improved.

show abstract

Section: B Consensus (Binary-valued / Multi-valued)mentioning

confidence: 99%