Age-aware Fairness in Blockchain Transaction Ordering

In blockchain applications, transaction latency is crucial for determining the quality of service (QoS). Transaction latency is measured as the time between its issuance and its inclusion in a block in the chain. When different applications use the same blockchain network, a block proposer often prioritizes its own application transactions over other applications transactions to minimize its own latency. To maintain fairness, a block proposer is typically supposed to select the included transactions randomly providing each transaction similar chances to be included. The random selection might cause some transactions to experience high latency since this selection implies a high variance in the time a transaction waits until it is selected. We suggest an alternative, age-aware approach towards fairness so that transaction priority is increased upon observing a large waiting time. The challenge with this approach is that the age of a transaction is not absolute due to transaction propagation. Moreover, a node might present its transactions as older to obtain priority. We consider three network restrictions on transaction propagation and explain how to enhance fairness in each one of them. We describe three declaration schemes in which a node declares its pending transactions providing the ability to validate transaction age. We demonstrate the advantages of the solutions on Ethereum and synthetic data in reducing tail latency. Stand up in the presence of the aged Leviticus 19:32

[1]  Adi Shamir,et al.  A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems , 1978, CACM.

[2]  Daniel Davis Wood,et al.  ETHEREUM: A SECURE DECENTRALISED GENERALISED TRANSACTION LEDGER , 2014 .

[3]  Ronen Tamari,et al.  A Fair Consensus Protocol for Transaction Ordering , 2018, 2018 IEEE 26th International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP).

[4]  Ihsan Ayyub Qazi,et al.  Reducing tail latency using duplication: a multi-layered approach , 2019, CoNEXT.

[5]  Sungjoo Yoo,et al.  Dynamic Management of Key States for Reinforcement Learning-assisted Garbage Collection to Reduce Long Tail Latency in SSD , 2018, 2018 55th ACM/ESDA/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC).

[6]  Satoshi Nakamoto Bitcoin : A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System , 2009 .

[7]  Christian Decker,et al.  Information propagation in the Bitcoin network , 2013, IEEE P2P 2013 Proceedings.

[8]  Silvio Micali,et al.  Algorand: Scaling Byzantine Agreements for Cryptocurrencies , 2017, IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch..

[9]  Ricardo Bianchini,et al.  Few-to-Many: Incremental Parallelism for Reducing Tail Latency in Interactive Services , 2015, ASPLOS.

[10]  Adi Shamir,et al.  A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems , 1978, CACM.

[11]  Haim Kaplan,et al.  Upward Max Min Fairness , 2012, 2012 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM.

[12]  Elaine Shi,et al.  The Honey Badger of BFT Protocols , 2016, CCS.

[13]  Dan Boneh,et al.  Batching Techniques for Accumulators with Applications to IOPs and Stateless Blockchains , 2019, IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch..

[14]  Idit Keidar,et al.  FairLedger: A Fair Blockchain Protocol for Financial Institutions , 2019, OPODIS.

[15]  Birgit Pfitzmann,et al.  Collision-Free Accumulators and Fail-Stop Signature Schemes Without Trees , 1997, EUROCRYPT.

[16]  Moni Naor,et al.  Pricing via Processing or Combatting Junk Mail , 1992, CRYPTO.

[17]  Ari Juels,et al.  Order-Fairness for Byzantine Consensus , 2020, IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch..

[18]  Pål Nilsson,et al.  Fairness in Communication and Computer Network Design , 2006 .

[19]  Ralph C. Merkle,et al.  Secrecy, authentication, and public key systems , 1979 .

[20]  Aggelos Kiayias,et al.  Ouroboros: A Provably Secure Proof-of-Stake Blockchain Protocol , 2017, CRYPTO.

[21]  Ariel Orda,et al.  Enforcing Fairness in Blockchain Transaction Ordering , 2019, Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications.

[22]  Yonggang Wen,et al.  A Survey on Consensus Mechanisms and Mining Strategy Management in Blockchain Networks , 2018, IEEE Access.

[23]  Raj Jain,et al.  A Quantitative Measure Of Fairness And Discrimination For Resource Allocation In Shared Computer Systems , 1998, ArXiv.