Rigorous Design of Moving Sequencer Atomic Broadcast with Malicious Sequencer

This article investigates a mechanism to tolerate malicious nature of sequencer in moving sequencer based atomic broadcast in distributed systems. Various mechanisms are already given for moving sequencer based atomic broadcast like RMP [1], DTP [2], Pin Wheel [3] and mechanism proposed by Srivastava et al. [4]. But none of these mechanisms are efficient to tolerate different failure. Scholarly observation is that, these algorithms can tolerate only crash failure but not capable to tolerate omission or byzantine (malicious) failure. This work proposes a mechanism to tolerate byzantine failure (malicious nature) of sequencer in moving sequencer based atomic broadcast. The mechanism proposed in [4], has been considered as an abstract model and design refined model in order to fulfill objective. Since it relies on unicast broadcast hence it will introduce a very less number of messages in comparison to previous mechanisms [5]. B [6] formal technique has been used for development of this model and Pro B [7] model checker tool for constraint based checking to discover errors due to invariant violation and deadlocks, thereby, validating the specifications. The models have been verified for invariant violations, errors and deadlock occurrence. The B machine animated through Pro B worked very well. The Pro B managed to explore the entire state space of the B-machine in few minutes and confirming the specifications.

[1]  Piotr Berman,et al.  Quick Atomic Broadcast (Extended Abstract) , 1993, WDAG.

[2]  Leslie Lamport,et al.  The Implementation of Reliable Distributed Multiprocess Systems , 1978, Comput. Networks.

[3]  Andrew S. Tanenbaum,et al.  An evaluation of the Amoeba group communication system , 1996, Proceedings of 16th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems.

[4]  Michael J. Butler,et al.  ProB: A Model Checker for B , 2003, FME.

[5]  Flaviu Cristian,et al.  High-performance asynchronous atomic broadcast , 1997, Distributed Syst. Eng..

[6]  André Schiper,et al.  A hierarchy of totally ordered multicasts , 1995, Proceedings. 14th Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems.

[7]  Jo-Mei Chang,et al.  Reliable broadcast protocols , 1984, TOCS.

[8]  Fred B. Schneider,et al.  Implementing fault-tolerant services using the state machine approach: a tutorial , 1990, CSUR.

[9]  André Schiper,et al.  A Fault-Tolerant Token-Based Atomic Broadcast Algorithm , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing.

[10]  Jongsung Kim,et al.  A total ordering protocol using a dynamic token-passing scheme , 1997, Distributed Syst. Eng..

[11]  Michael K. Reiter,et al.  Distributing trust with the Rampart toolkit , 1996, CACM.

[12]  Kamaljit I. Lakhtaria,et al.  Rigorous design of moving sequencer crash tolerant atomic broadcast with unicast broadcast , 2014, International Conference on Recent Advances and Innovations in Engineering (ICRAIE-2014).

[13]  Sam Toueg,et al.  Fault-tolerant broadcasts and related problems , 1993 .

[14]  André Schiper,et al.  Lightweight causal and atomic group multicast , 1991, TOCS.

[15]  Jean-Raymond Abrial,et al.  The B-book - assigning programs to meanings , 1996 .

[16]  Jon Crowcroft,et al.  A multicast transport protocol , 1988, SIGCOMM.

[17]  Samuel T. Chanson,et al.  Reliable group communication in distributed systems , 1988, [1988] Proceedings. The 8th International Conference on Distributed.

[18]  Michael K. Reiter,et al.  Secure agreement protocols: reliable and atomic group multicast in rampart , 1994, CCS '94.

[19]  Weijia Jia,et al.  RMP: fault-tolerant group communication , 1996, IEEE Micro.

[20]  P. Metzger,et al.  Network Working Group , 2000 .

[21]  Xiaohua Jia A Total Ordering Multicast Protocol Using Propagation Trees , 1995, IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst..

[22]  Sape J. Mullender,et al.  Distributed systems (2nd Ed.) , 1993 .

[23]  Hector Garcia-Molina,et al.  Ordered and reliable multicast communication , 1991, TOCS.