Skip to main content

Making an Agreement in an Order-Heterogeneous Group

  • Conference paper
  • 470 Accesses

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 5186))

Abstract

In traditional agreement protocols of multiple peer processes (peers), every peer just aims at agreeing on one value out of values shown by the peers. In meetings of human societies, agreement procedures are so flexible that persons can change their opinions and can use various types of agreement conditions. We already discuss E- and P-precedent relations v 1 \(\rightarrow_i^E\) v 2 and v 1 \(\rightarrow_i^P\) v 2 on values v 1 and v 2 of a peer p i , which show that p i can take v 2 after taking v 1 and prefers v 1 to v 2, respectively. If a peer autonomously takes values only based on its precedent relations, the peers might not make an agreement even if the values satisfy the agreement condition. We discuss what previous values the peer can take again an order-heterogenous system where some pair of peers have different precedent relations. In this paper, we discuss a cut, i.e. a satisfiable set of previous values in a history of values which the peers have so far taken, in addition for each peer to taking a new value at each round.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Peer-to-peer, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer-to-peer

  2. Aikebaier, A., Enokido, T., Takizawa, M.: Checkpointing in a Distributed Coordination Protocol for Multiple Peer Processes. In: Second International Conference on Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems (CISIS 2008), pp. 48–54 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ailebaier, A., Hayashibara, N., Enokido, T., Takizawa, M.: A Distributed Coordination Protocol for a Heterogeneous Group of Peer Processes. In: IEEE 21th Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications (AINA 2007), pp. 565–572 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ailebaier, A., Hayashibara, N., Enokido, T., Takizawa, M.: Making an Agreement in an Order-Heterogeneous Group by using a Distributed Coordination Protocol. In: 2nd International Workshop on Advanced Distributed and Parallel Network Applications (ADPNA 2007), CD-ROM (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Corman, A.B., Schachte, P., Teague, V.: A Secure Group Agreement (SGA) Protocol for Peer-to-Peer Applications. In: 21st International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications Workshops (AINAW 2007), pp. 24–29 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ezhilchelvan, P., Morgan, G.: A Dependable Distributed Auction System: Architecture and an Implementation Framework. In: IEEE 5th International Symposium on Autonomous Decentralized Systems (ISADS), p. 3 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gray, J., Lamport, L.: Consensus on Transaction Commit. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS) archive 31(1), 133–160 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hurfin, M., Raynal, M., Tronel, F., Macedo, R.: A General Framework to Solve Agreement Problems. In: 18th IEEE Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems (SRDS), pp. 56–65 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kling, R.: Cooperation, Coordination and Control in Computer-supported Work. Communications of the ACM 34(12), 83–88 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lamport, L., Shostak, R., Pease, M.: The Byzantine Generals Problem. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 4(3), 382–401 (1982)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Lee, P., Lui, J., Yau, D.: Distributed Collaborative Key Agreement Protocols for Dynamic Peer Groups. In: 10th IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols, pp. 322–331 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sabater, J., Sierra, C.: Reputation and Social Network Analysis in Multi-agent Systems. In: first international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems: part 1, pp. 475–482 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shimojo, I., Tachikawa, T., Takizawa, M.: M-ary Commitment Protocol with Partially Ordered Domain. In: Tjoa, A.M. (ed.) DEXA 1997. LNCS, vol. 1308, pp. 397–408. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Skeen, D.: NonBlocking Commit Protocols. In: Proceedings of the ACMSIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pp. 133–142 (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Upadrashta, Y., Vassileva, J., Grassmann, W.: Social Networks in Peer-to-Peer Systems. In: 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences(HICSS-38 2005), CD-ROM (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Freenet, http://freenetproject.org/

  17. Gnutella, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnutella

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Makoto Takizawa Leonard Barolli Tomoya Enokido

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Aikebaier, A., Enokido, T., Takizawa, M. (2008). Making an Agreement in an Order-Heterogeneous Group. In: Takizawa, M., Barolli, L., Enokido, T. (eds) Network-Based Information Systems. NBiS 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5186. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85693-1_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85693-1_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-85692-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-85693-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics