| O. Babaoglu, P. Stephenson, and R. Drummond. Reliable broadcasts and communication models: tradeoffs and lower bounds. Distributed Computing, 2(4):177--189, Aug. 1988. |
....case, the result for deterministic algorithms carried over fairly easily. For comparison, note that Feldman and Micali [52] have a new constant expected time randomized Byzantine agreement algorithm for the case where a small probability of error is allowed. Babaoglu, Stephenson and Drummond [17] showed similar lower bounds for models in which broadcast communication, rather than point to point communication, is used. Their bounds depend on the broad cast degree . The paper [36] contains a lower bound for the number of rounds required for distributed processes to reach approximate ....
O. Babaoglu, P. Stephenson, and R. Drum- mond. Reliable broadcasts and communication models: tradeoffs and lower bounds. Dis- tributed Computing, 2:177-189, 1988.
....of the network, that is, agreement is achievable if and only if the number of faulty processes in the system is less than one third of the total number of processes and less than one half of the connectivity of the network. 4.1.4. Broadcast networks In [Babaoglu Drummond 1985] and [Babaoglu et al. 1988], which present consensus protocols executing over shared, multiple access media that support broadcasts, a strong assumption is made about the network, in that there is supposed to be a guaranteed minimum number of processes receiving the same message in response to a broadcast (the receiving ....
....networks (2 b n) protocols have been presented that solve the consensus problem with omission failures and are optimal with respect to time complexity. Specifically, a 2 round protocol for b m and a (m b 3) round protocol for b m are presented in [Babaoglu Drummond 1985] and [Babaoglu et al. 1988] respectively. Note that the execution time of the second protocol increases linearly from 2 rounds to m 1 as the broadcast degree decreases from m 1 to 2 (corresponding to the point to point case) The availability of a multiple bus network is exploited in [Echtle Masum 1996] as well. ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
O. Babaoglu, P. Stephenson and R. Drummond, "Reliable Broadcasts and Communication Models: Tradeoffs and Lower Bounds", Distributed Computing, 2, pp.177-89, 1988.
.... we were unaware of other protocols for atomic broadcast designed for system models more realistic than those assumed in the Byzantine agreement literature [F] LSP] SD] Since then, several other protocols for atomic broadcast in system models similar to ours have been proposed (e.g. BJ] [BSD], Ca] CM] D] GSTC] PG] SDC] All protocols proposed so far can be divided into two classes: time oriented protocols providing bounded termination times even when failures occur during broadcast, and acknowledgement based protocols that do not provide bounded termination times if ....
....protocols providing bounded termination times even when failures occur during broadcast, and acknowledgement based protocols that do not provide bounded termination times if failures occur during a broadcast. Examples of protocols in the first class (other than those given in this paper) are [BSD], GSTC] PG] and [SDC] Examples of acknowledgement based protocols are [BJ] Ca] CM] and [D] While the acknowledgement based protocols have the potential of tolerating performance failures that can cause network partitioning, diffusion protocols cannot tolerate partition failures. We have ....
O. Babaoglu, P. Stephenson, R. Drumond: "Reliable Broadcasts and Communication Models: Tradeoffs and Lower Bounds," Distributed Computing, No. 2, pp. 177-189, 1988.
No context found.
O. Babaoglu, P. Stephenson, and R. Drummond. Reliable broadcasts and communication models: tradeoffs and lower bounds. Distributed Computing, 2(4):177--189, Aug. 1988.
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