K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal, "A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols," J. Comput. Commun., vol. 18, pp. 276--287, Apr. 1995.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....Related work falls mainly in the areas of protocol verification, VLSI test generation and network simulation. There is a large body of literature dealing with verification of protocols. Verification systems typically address well defined properties such as safety, liveness, and responsiveness [20] and aim to detect violations of these properties. In general, the two main approaches for protocol verification are theorem proving and reachability analysis [21] Theorem proving systems define a set of axioms and relations to prove properties, and include model 13 Adaptive timers adjust ....

K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal. A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols. Journal of Computer Communication, Vol. 18, No. 4, pages 276--287, April 1995.

....are discussed in Section VI D. A. Protocol Verification Protocol verification is the problem of ensuring the logical consistency of the protocol specification, independent of any particular implementation. Protocol verification typically addresses safety, liveness, and responsiveness properties [22]. Safety properties include freedom from deadlocks, assertion violations, improper terminations and unspecified receptions. Liveness properties include detection of acceptance cycles and absence of non progress cycles, while responsiveness properties include timeliness and fault tolerance, which ....

K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal. A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols. Journal of Computer Communication, Vol. 18, No. 4, pages 276--287, April 1995.

....addresses architecture, specification, and comparisons between different protocols. There is a large body of literature dealing with verification of communication protocols. Protocol verification typically addresses well defined properties, such as safety, liveness, and responsiveness properties [13]. Safety properties include freedom from deadlocks, assertion violations, improper terminations and unspecified receptions. Liveness properties include detection of acceptance cycles and absence of non progress cycles, while responsiveness properties 1 We use the term LAN to designate a ....

K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal. A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols. Journal of Computer Communication, Vol. 18, No. 4, pages 276--287, April 1995.

....presented in the above study. 3.1 Protocol Verification Protocol verification is the problem of ensuring the logical consistency of the protocol specification, independent of any particular implementation. Protocol verification typically addresses safety, liveness, and responsiveness properties [24]. Safety properties include freedom from deadlocks, assertion violations, improper terminations and unspecified receptions. Liveness properties include detection of acceptance cycles and absence of non progress cycles, while responsiveness properties include timeliness and fault tolerance, which ....

K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal. A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols. Journal of Computer Communication, Vol. 18, No. 4, pages 276--287, April 1995.

....for testing multiparty protocol robustness. In addition, some concepts of STRESS were inspired by VLSI chip testing. There is a large body of literature dealing with verification of communication protocols. Protocol verification typically addresses safety, liveness, and responsiveness properties [23]. Safety properties include freedom from deadlocks, assertion violations, improper terminations and unspecified receptions. Liveness properties include detection of acceptance cycles and absence of non progress cycles, while responsiveness properties include timeliness and fault This is different ....

K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal. A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols. Journal of Computer Communication, Vol. 18, No. 4, pages 276--287, April 1995.

....other work to develop automatic test generation for multicast protocol robustness. There is a large body of literature dealing with verification of communication protocols. Protocol verification typically addresses well defined properties, such as safety, liveness, and responsiveness properties [16]. Safety properties include freedom from deadlocks, assertion violations, improper terminations and unspecified receptions. Liveness properties include detection of acceptance cycles and absence of non progress cycles, while responsiveness properties include timeliness and fault tolerance. Most ....

K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal. A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols. Journal of Computer Communication, Vol. 18, No. 4, pages 276--287, April 1995.

....for testing multiparty protocol robustness. In addition, some concepts of STRESS were inspired by VLSI chip testing. There is a large body of literature dealing with verification of communication protocols. Protocol verification typically addresses safety, liveness, and responsiveness properties [22]. Safety properties include freedom from deadlocks, assertion violations, improper terminations and unspecified receptions. Liveness properties include detection of acceptance cycles and absence of non progress cycles. While responsiveness properties include timeliness and fault tolerance. Most ....

K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal. A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols. Journal of Computer Communication, Vol. 18, No. 4, pages 276--287, April 1995.

No context found.

K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal, "A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols," J. Comput. Commun., vol. 18, pp. 276--287, Apr. 1995.

....Related work falls mainly in the areas of protocol verification, VLSI test generation and network simulation. There is a large body of literature dealing with verification of protocols. Verification systems typically address welldefined properties such as safety, liveness, and responsiveness [24] and aim to detect violations of these properties. In general, the two main approaches for protocol verification are theorem proving and reachability analysis [25] Adaptive timers adjust their interval based on the number of duplicate responses received and the estimated distance to the ....

K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal. A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols. Journal of Computer Communication, Vol. 18, No. 4, pages 276--287, April 1995.

....Related work falls mainly in the areas of protocol verification, VLSI test generation and network simulation. There is a large body of literature dealing with verification of protocols. Verification systems typically address welldefined properties such as safety, liveness, and responsiveness [20] and aim to detect violations of these properties. In general, the two main approaches for protocol verification are theorem proving and reachability analysis [21] Theorem proving systems define a set of axioms and relations to prove properties, and include model based and logicbased ....

K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal. A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols. Journal of Computer Communication, Vol. 18, No. 4, pages 276--287, April 1995.

....and multipoint protocols, especially those related to the timer suppression mechanism used in this paper. There is a large body of literature dealing with verification of protocols. Verification systems typically address well defined properties such as safety, liveness, and responsiveness [16] and aim to detect violations of these properties. In general, the two main approaches for protocol verification are theorem proving and reachability analysis [17] Theorem proving systems define a set of axioms and relations to prove properties, and include model based and logic based ....

K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal. A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols. Journal of Computer Communication, Vol. 18, No. 4, pages 276--287, April 1995.

....is given in section 1.5. 1.2 RELATED WORK There is a large body of literature dealing with verification of protocols. Verification systems typically address well defined properties such as safety (e.g. deadlock freedom) liveness (e.g. livelock freedom) and responsiveness (e.g. timeliness) [5] and aim to detect violations of these properties. In general, the two main approaches for protocol verification are theorem proving and reachability analysis [6] Theorem proving systems define a set of axioms and relations to prove properties mathematically. Theorem proving includes ....

K. Saleh, I. Ahmed, K. Al-Saqabi, and A. Agarwal. A recovery approach to the design of stabilizing communication protocols. Journal of Computer Communication, Vol. 18, No. 4, pages 276--287, April 1995. 16

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC