×

Effects of topology knowledge and relay depth on asynchronous appoximate consensus. (English) Zbl 07561442

Cao, Jiannong (ed.) et al., 22nd international conference on principles of distributed systems, OPODIS 2018, December 17–19, 2018, Hong Kong, China. Wadern: Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Zentrum für Informatik. LIPIcs – Leibniz Int. Proc. Inform. 125, Article 14, 16 p. (2019).
Summary: Consider a point-to-point message-passing network. We are interested in the asynchronous crash-tolerant consensus problem in incomplete networks. We study the feasibility and efficiency of approximate consensus under different restrictions on topology knowledge and the relay depth, i.e., the maximum number of hops any message can be relayed. These two constraints are common in large-scale networks, and are used to avoid memory overload and network congestion respectively. Specifically, for positive integer values \(k\) and \(k'\), we consider that each node knows all its neighbors of at most \(k\)-hop distance (\(k\)-hop topology knowledge), and the relay depth is \(k'\). We consider both directed and undirected graphs. More concretely, we answer the following question in asynchronous systems:
What is a tight condition on the underlying communication graphs for achieving approximate consensus if each node has only a \(k\)-hop topology knowledge and relay depth \(k'\)?
To prove that the necessary conditions presented in the paper are also sufficient, we have developed algorithms that achieve consensus in graphs satisfying those conditions:
The first class of algorithms requires \(k\)-hop topology knowledge and relay depth \(k\). Unlike prior algorithms, these algorithms do not flood the network, and each node does not need the full topology knowledge. We show how the convergence time and the message complexity of those algorithms is affected by \(k\), providing the respective upper bounds.
The second set of algorithms requires only one-hop neighborhood knowledge, i.e., immediate incoming and outgoing neighbors, but needs to flood the network (i.e., relay depth is \(n\), where \(n\) is the number of nodes). One result that may be of independent interest is a topology discovery mechanism to learn and “estimate” the topology in asynchronous directed networks with crash faults.

For the entire collection see [Zbl 1407.68024].

MSC:

68M14 Distributed systems
68M20 Performance evaluation, queueing, and scheduling in the context of computer systems

References:

[1] EduardoA.P. Alchieri, AlyssonNeves Bessani, Joni Silva Fraga, and Fabíola Greve. Byz-antine Consensus with Unknown Participants. In Principles of Distributed Systems, volume 5401 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 22-40. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-92221-6_4. · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-92221-6_4
[2] Distributed Computing, PODC ’13, pages 74-83, New York, NY, USA, 2013. ACM. doi:10.1145/2484239.2484275. · Zbl 1323.68550 · doi:10.1145/2484239.2484275
[3] Piyush Bansal, Prasant Gopal, Anuj Gupta, Kannan Srinathan, and Pranav Kumar Vas-ishta. Byzantine agreement using partial authentication. In Proceedings of the 25th inter-national conference on Distributed computing, DISC’11, pages 389-403, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. Springer-Verlag. URL: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2075029.2075079. · Zbl 1350.68033
[4] Martin Biely, Peter Robinson, and Ulrich Schmid. Agreement in Directed Dynamic Net-works. In Guy Even and Magnús M. Halldórsson, editors, Structural Information and Communication Complexity, pages 73-84, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012. Springer Berlin Heidel-berg.
[5] Martin Biely, Peter Robinson, Ulrich Schmid, Manfred Schwarz, and Kyrill Winkler. Grace-fully Degrading Consensus and k-Set Agreement in Directed Dynamic Networks. In Ahmed Bouajjani and Hugues Fauconnier, editors, Networked Systems, pages 109-124, Cham, 2015. Springer International Publishing. · Zbl 1390.68086
[6] Martin Biely, Peter Robinson, Ulrich Schmid, Manfred Schwarz, and Kyrill Winkler. Grace-fully degrading consensus and k-set agreement in directed dynamic networks. Theoretical Computer Science, 726:41-77, 2018. doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2018.02.019. · Zbl 1390.68086 · doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2018.02.019
[7] Bernadette Charron-Bost, Matthias Függer, and Thomas Nowak. Approximate Consensus in Highly Dynamic Networks. CoRR, abs/1408.0620, 2014. URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/ 1408.0620, arXiv:1408.0620. · Zbl 1417.68012
[8] Bernadette Charron-Bost, Matthias Függer, and Thomas Nowak. Approximate Consensus in Highly Dynamic Networks: The Role of Averaging Algorithms. In Proceedings, Part II, of the 42Nd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming -Volume 9135, ICALP 2015, pages 528-539, New York, NY, USA, 2015. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-47666-6_42. · Zbl 1417.68012 · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-47666-6_42
[9] Étienne Coulouma and Emmanuel Godard. A Characterization of Dynamic Networks Where Consensus Is Solvable. In Thomas Moscibroda and Adele A. Rescigno, editors, Structural Information and Communication Complexity, pages 24-35, Cham, 2013. Springer International Publishing. · Zbl 1406.68003
[10] S. M. Dibaji, H. Ishii, and R. Tempo. Resilient Randomized Quantized Consensus. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, PP(99):1-1, 2017. doi:10.1109/TAC.2017.2771363. · Zbl 1423.93013 · doi:10.1109/TAC.2017.2771363
[11] Danny Dolev. The Byzantine Generals Strike Again. Journal of Algorithms, 3(1), March 1982. · Zbl 0495.68093
[12] Danny Dolev, Nancy A. Lynch, Shlomit S. Pinter, Eugene W. Stark, and William E. Weihl. Reaching approximate agreement in the presence of faults. J. ACM, 33:499-516, May 1986. doi:10.1145/5925.5931. · Zbl 0627.68027 · doi:10.1145/5925.5931
[13] Michael J. Fischer, Nancy A. Lynch, and Michael Merritt. Easy impossibility proofs for distributed consensus problems. In Proceedings of the fourth annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing, PODC ’85, pages 59-70, New York, NY, USA, 1985. ACM. doi:10.1145/323596.323602. · doi:10.1145/323596.323602
[14] Heath LeBlanc, Haotian Zhang, Xenofon D. Koutsoukos, and Shreyas Sundaram. Resilient Asymptotic Consensus in Robust Networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Commu-nications, 31(4), 2013. doi:10.1109/JSAC.2013.130413. · doi:10.1109/JSAC.2013.130413
[15] Nancy A. Lynch. Distributed Algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, 1996. · Zbl 0877.68061
[16] Alexandre Maurer, Sébastien Tixeuil, and Xavier Défago. Reliable Communication in a Dynamic Network in the Presence of Byzantine Faults. CoRR, abs/1402.0121, 2014. URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/1402.0121, arXiv:1402.0121.
[17] Mikhail Nesterenko and Sébastien Tixeuil. Discovering Network Topology in the Presence of Byzantine Faults. In Structural Information and Communication Complexity, pages 212-226, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2006. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. · Zbl 1222.68047
[18] Aris Pagourtzis, Giorgos Panagiotakos, and Dimitris Sakavalas. Reliable broadcast with respect to topology knowledge. Distributed Computing, 30(2):87-102, 2017. doi:10.1007/ s00446-016-0279-6. · Zbl 1420.68023 · doi:10.1007/s00446-016-0279-6
[19] Aris Pagourtzis, Giorgos Panagiotakos, and Dimitris Sakavalas. Reliable Communication via Semilattice Properties of Partial Knowledge. In Ralf Klasing and Marc Zeitoun, ed-itors, Fundamentals of Computation Theory -21st International Symposium, FCT 2017, Bordeaux, France, September 11-13, 2017, Proceedings, volume 10472 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 367-380. Springer, 2017. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-55751-8_29. · Zbl 1496.68048 · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-55751-8_29
[20] M. Pease, R. Shostak, and L. Lamport. Reaching Agreement in the Presence of Faults. J. ACM, 27(2):228-234, April 1980. doi:10.1145/322186.322188. · Zbl 0434.68031 · doi:10.1145/322186.322188
[21] Dimitris Sakavalas, Lewis Tseng, and Nitin H. Vaidya. Asynchronous Crash-Tolerant Ap-proximate Consensus in Directed Graphs: Topology Knowledge. CoRR, abs/1803.04513, 2018. arXiv:1803.04513.
[22] Lili Su and Nitin Vaidya. Reaching Approximate Byzantine Consensus with Multi-hop Com-munication. In Andrzej Pelc and Alexander A. Schwarzmann, editors, Stabilization, Safety, and Security of Distributed Systems, volume 9212 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 21-35. Springer International Publishing, 2015. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21741-3_2. · Zbl 1428.68082 · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21741-3_2
[23] Lewis Tseng and Nitin H. Vaidya. Fault-Tolerant Consensus in Directed Graphs. In Pro-ceedings of the 2015 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, PODC ’15, pages 451-460, New York, NY, USA, 2015. ACM. doi:10.1145/2767386.2767399. · Zbl 1333.68072 · doi:10.1145/2767386.2767399
[24] Lewis Tseng and Nitin H. Vaidya. Iterative approximate Byzantine consensus under a generalized fault model. In In International Conference on Distributed Computing and Networking (ICDCN), January 2013. · Zbl 1352.68024
[25] Nitin H. Vaidya, Lewis Tseng, and Guanfeng Liang. Iterative Approximate Byzantine Consensus in Arbitrary Directed Graphs. In Proceedings of the thirty-first annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing, PODC ’12. ACM, 2012. · Zbl 1301.68168
[26] H. Zhang and S. Sundaram. Robustness of distributed algorithms to locally bounded adversaries. In Proceedings of ACC 2012, the 31st American Control Conference, 2012.
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.