1 Eventual Leader Election in Evolving Mobile Networks Luciana Arantes 1, Fabiola Greve 2, Véronique Simon 1, and Pierre Sens 1 1 Université de Paris 6.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Fault Tolerance. Basic System Concept Basic Definitions Failure: deviation of a system from behaviour described in its specification. Error: part of.
Advertisements

Distributed Snapshots: Determining Global States of Distributed Systems - K. Mani Chandy and Leslie Lamport.
Impossibility of Distributed Consensus with One Faulty Process
CS 542: Topics in Distributed Systems Diganta Goswami.
Lecture 8: Asynchronous Network Algorithms
Teaser - Introduction to Distributed Computing
Chapter 15 Basic Asynchronous Network Algorithms
Leader Election Let G = (V,E) define the network topology. Each process i has a variable L(i) that defines the leader.  i,j  V  i,j are non-faulty.
CIS 540 Principles of Embedded Computation Spring Instructor: Rajeev Alur
Distributed Computing 8. Impossibility of consensus Shmuel Zaks ©
Failure detector The story goes back to the FLP’85 impossibility result about consensus in presence of crash failures. If crash can be detected, then consensus.
Ranveer Chandra , Kenneth P. Birman Department of Computer Science
Max-Min D-Cluster Formation in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks - Alan Amis, Ravi Prakash, Thai Vuong, Dung Huynh Presenter: Nirav Shah.
UPV / EHU Efficient Eventual Leader Election in Crash-Recovery Systems Mikel Larrea, Cristian Martín, Iratxe Soraluze University of the Basque Country,
Byzantine Generals Problem: Solution using signed messages.
Failure Detectors. Can we do anything in asynchronous systems? Reliable broadcast –Process j sends a message m to all processes in the system –Requirement:
Mobile and Wireless Computing Institute for Computer Science, University of Freiburg Western Australian Interactive Virtual Environments Centre (IVEC)
Global State Collection. Global state collection Some applications - computing network topology - termination detection - deadlock detection Chandy-Lamport.
Fail-Safe Mobility Management and Collision Prevention Platform for Cooperative Mobile Robots with Asynchronous Communications Rami Yared School of Information.
1 Complexity of Network Synchronization Raeda Naamnieh.
UPV - EHU An Evaluation of Communication-Optimal P Algorithms Mikel Larrea Iratxe Soraluze Roberto Cortiñas Alberto Lafuente Department of Computer Architecture.
Distributed systems Module 2 -Distributed algorithms Teaching unit 1 – Basic techniques Ernesto Damiani University of Bozen Lesson 3 – Distributed Systems.
 Idit Keidar, Principles of Reliable Distributed Systems, Technion EE, Spring Principles of Reliable Distributed Systems Lecture 7: Failure Detectors.
Asynchronous Consensus (Some Slides borrowed from ppt on Web.(by Ken Birman) )
He Huang Introduction:The Flooding Time Synchronization Protocol.
Asynchronous Ad-hoc Leader Election in Complete Networks Nolan Irving.
Josef WidderBooting Clock Synchronization1 The  - Model, and how to Boot Clock Synchronization in it Josef Widder Embedded Computing Systems Group
1 Principles of Reliable Distributed Systems Recitation 8 ◊S-based Consensus Spring 2009 Alex Shraer.
Distributed systems Module 2 -Distributed algorithms Teaching unit 1 – Basic techniques Ernesto Damiani University of Bozen Lesson 4 – Consensus and reliable.
Distributed systems Module 2 -Distributed algorithms Teaching unit 1 – Basic techniques Ernesto Damiani University of Bozen Lesson 2 – Distributed Systems.
 Idit Keidar, Principles of Reliable Distributed Systems, Technion EE, Spring Principles of Reliable Distributed Systems Lecture 6: Impossibility.
An Energy Efficient Leaser Election Algorithm for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Paolo Cemim, Vinicius De Antoni Instituto de Informatica Universidade Federal.
Distributed Systems Tutorial 4 – Solving Consensus using Chandra-Toueg’s unreliable failure detector: A general Quorum-Based Approach.
On the Cost of Fault-Tolerant Consensus When There are no Faults Idit Keidar & Sergio Rajsbaum Appears in SIGACT News; MIT Tech. Report.
 Idit Keidar, Principles of Reliable Distributed Systems, Technion EE, Spring Principles of Reliable Distributed Systems Lecture 7: Failure Detectors.
Efficient Algorithms to Implement Failure Detectors and Solve Consensus in Distributed Systems Mikel Larrea Departamento de Arquitectura y Tecnología de.
Composition Model and its code. bound:=bound+1.
State Machines CS 614 Thursday, Feb 21, 2002 Bill McCloskey.
Eventual Leader Election in Infinite Arrival Message- passing System Model with Bounded Concurrency Sara Tucci Piergiovanni, Roberto Baldoni University.
Introduction Distributed Algorithms for Multi-Agent Networks Instructor: K. Sinan YILDIRIM.
1 A Mutual Exclusion Algorithm for Ad Hoc Mobile networks Presentation by Sanjeev Verma For COEN th Nov, 2003 J. E. Walter, J. L. Welch and N. Vaidya.
Leader Election Algorithms for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Presented by: Joseph Gunawan.
Review for Exam 2. Topics included Deadlock detection Resource and communication deadlock Graph algorithms: Routing, spanning tree, MST, leader election.
Computer Science and Engineering Parallel and Distributed Processing CSE 8380 February 10, 2005 Session 9.
04/06/2016Applied Algorithmics - week101 Dynamic vs. Static Networks  Ideally, we would like distributed algorithms to be: dynamic, i.e., be able to.
1 Leader Election in Rings. 2 A Ring Network Sense of direction left right.
Distributed systems Consensus Prof R. Guerraoui Distributed Programming Laboratory.
Chap 15. Agreement. Problem Processes need to agree on a single bit No link failures A process can fail by crashing (no malicious behavior) Messages take.
Leader Election (if we ignore the failure detection part)
Several sets of slides by Prof. Jennifer Welch will be used in this course. The slides are mostly identical to her slides, with some minor changes. Set.
SysRép / 2.5A. SchiperEté The consensus problem.
1 © R. Guerraoui Distributed algorithms Prof R. Guerraoui Assistant Marko Vukolic Exam: Written, Feb 5th Reference: Book - Springer.
Impossibility of Distributed Consensus with One Faulty Process By, Michael J.Fischer Nancy A. Lynch Michael S.Paterson.
Achieving Consensus with Unknown Participants Jichiang Tsai ( 蔡智強 ) 國立中興大學電機工程學系.
Hwajung Lee. Let G = (V,E) define the network topology. Each process i has a variable L(i) that defines the leader.   i,j  V  i,j are non-faulty ::
Global Clock Synchronization in Sensor Networks Qun Li, Member, IEEE, and Daniela Rus, Member, IEEE IEEE Transactions on Computers 2006 Chien-Ku Lai.
1 Fault tolerance in distributed systems n Motivation n robust and stabilizing algorithms n failure models n robust algorithms u decision problems u impossibility.
Fault tolerance and related issues in distributed computing Shmuel Zaks GSSI - Feb
Relying on Safe Distance to Achieve Strong Partitionable Group Membership in Ad Hoc Networks Authors: Q. Huang, C. Julien, G. Roman Presented By: Jeff.
CIS 825 Review session. P1: Assume that processes are arranged in a ring topology. Consider the following modification of the Lamport’s mutual exclusion.
Distributed Systems Lecture 9 Leader election 1. Previous lecture Middleware RPC and RMI – Marshalling 2.
Unreliable Failure Detectors for Reliable Distributed Systems Tushar Deepak Chandra Sam Toueg Presentation for EECS454 Lawrence Leinweber.
Leader Election (if we ignore the failure detection part)
EEC 688/788 Secure and Dependable Computing
EEC 688/788 Secure and Dependable Computing
Algorithms for Extracting Timeliness Graphs
EEC 688/788 Secure and Dependable Computing
Introduction to Self-Stabilization
EEC 688/788 Secure and Dependable Computing
Distributed systems Consensus
Presentation transcript:

1 Eventual Leader Election in Evolving Mobile Networks Luciana Arantes 1, Fabiola Greve 2, Véronique Simon 1, and Pierre Sens 1 1 Université de Paris 6 (LIP6) / CNRS/ INRIA, France 2 DCC – Federal University of Bahia, Brazil OPODIS, Nice, Dec OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA

Roadmap Context/Motivation Model for dynamic network Eventual election algorithm Conclusion OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 2

3 Dynamic self-organized systems  Wireless ad-hoc networks (WMN, WSN) Key features  Unknown membership  Multi-hop networks  Dynamic changing topology churn, node mobility  Transmission range communication broadcast to neighborhood  Asynchronous systems no bound on processor speed and transmission delays Context

Eventual election The Ω failure detector satisfies (“eventual leader election”):  there is a time after which every correct process always trusts the same correct process Ω is the weakest failure detector for solving Consensus in the crash failure model OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 4 Context p1 p3 p4 p5 p2 Ω=p 2 correct crashed

Model for Failure Detection in Dynamic Networks The membership is unknown  A node is not aware about the set of nodes nor the number of them. Finite arrival model  The network is dynamic composed of infinite mobile nodes, but each run consist of a finite set n nodes. The system is asynchronous  There are no assumptions on the relative speed of processes nor on message transfer delays. Communication  Channels are fair-lossy  there is no message duplication, modification or creation OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 5 Note: node = process

Model (cont’d) Communication graph is dynamic  Dynamic topology represented by a time-varying graph (TVG) [CFQS11] : TVG =  A node p can reach q if there exists a journey between p and q (i.e., a path over time between p and q) p q time p r r s s q Latency OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 6

Processes status Let known q set denotes the partial knowledge of q. 2 sets of nodes :  STABLE (correct): nodes eventually and permanently correct  FAULTY: nodes which crash OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 7 Transmission range mobile node Stable node Model

Network connectivity Transmission TVG induced by the stable communicating nodes in the system  A message sent at time t induces an edge at t in the transmission TVG Network recurrent connectivity  TVG of class 5 There exists a journey between all stable nodes at any time  Eventually, the transmission TVG is connected other time OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 8

Timer-based x Timer-free assumptions The Ω failure can not be implemented in a pure asynchronous system  Two approaches: Timer-based  Constraint to satisfy message transfer delays  Channels are eventually timely Message exchange pattern  Constraint to satisfy a message delivery order  Query-response mechanism OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 9

Properties to implement an  Stable Termination Property (SatP):  Each QUERY must be received by at least one stable and known node Necessary for the diffusion of the information Stabilized Responsiveness Property (SRP):  There exists a time t after which all nodes of p i 's neighborhood receive, to every of their queries, a response from p i which is always among the first responses SRP should be hold for at least one stable known node (the eventual leader) OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 10

An Eventual Leader Election Algorithm Principle  Election of a leader process based on punishment  Periodic local query-response exchange Wait for  responses  If p j, locally known by p i, does not respond to a query of p among  i, p j is punished by p i. Exchange of information OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 11 r not punished r punished r not punished p q Waiting for  q responses … r Neighborho od qq

An Eventual Leader Election Algorithm Notation (p i )  mid i : a counter to timestamp every query-response message;  local_known i : the current knowledge of p i about its neighborhood set of tuples ; max known mid j  global_known i : the current knowledge of p i about the membership of the system set of tuples ; max known mid j  punish i : punished processes by p i set of tuples Query and Response message from p i  OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 12

Leader Election: Sending of Query OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 13 punishment * - p j is a neighbor of p i, - p j does not answer to p i, - p j is not suspected to have moved *

Reception of Query and Response; Invocation of the Leader OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 14 * * *update of p i ’s state about punishment, membership, and p i ’s neighborhood with more recent information : keeps the tuples with the greatest counter. *process with the smallest counter *

15 Exemple: Mobility of nodes 1 2 3,,,,, 4 local_known 1 punished 1 global_known 1, x: in local_known 1 in global_known 1 OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA, 1 stops punishing 4 5,,

Conclusion Model and and a timer-free algorithm to solve the eventual leader election in mobile dynamic systems The algorithm implement the Ω class of failure detectors using:  Query-response approach Failure detection and exchange of information  TGV framework Dynamics of the Network OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 16

Thank you OPODIS 2013: Paris 6 (CNRS/INRIA) and UFBA 17