Document Open Access Logo

Contention-Aware Cooperation

Authors Timothé Albouy , Davide Frey , Mathieu Gestin , Michel Raynal , François Taïani

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
LIPIcs.OPODIS.2025.9.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.89 MB
  • 19 pages

Document Identifiers

Related Versions

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Distributed algorithms
Keywords
  • Agreement
  • Asynchronous message-passing system
  • Byzantine processes
  • Conflict detection
  • Consensus
  • Cooperation abstraction
  • Distributed computing
  • Fault tolerance
  • Optimistically terminating consensus
  • Short-naming

Metrics

Abstract

As shown by Reliable Broadcast and Consensus, cooperation among a set of independent computing entities (sequential processes) is crucial in fault-tolerant distributed computing. Considering n-process asynchronous message-passing systems where some processes may be Byzantine, this paper introduces a novel cooperation abstraction, Contention-Aware Cooperation (CAC). While Reliable Broadcast is a one-to-n cooperation abstraction and Consensus is an n-to-n cooperation abstraction, CAC is a d-to-n cooperation abstraction where d (1 ≤ d ≤ n) varies with each run and remains unknown to the processes. Correct processes accept the same set of 𝓁 pairs ⟨ v,i ⟩ (v is the value proposed by p_i) from the d proposer processes, where 1 ≤ 𝓁 ≤ d and (as d) 𝓁 remains unknown to the processes (except in specific cases). Those 𝓁 values are accepted one at a time, potentially in different orders at each process. In addition, CAC provides each process with an imperfect oracle that provides insights into the values that they may accept in the future. Interestingly, the CAC abstraction is particularly efficient in favorable circumstances, when the oracle becomes accurate, which processes can detect. To illustrate its practical utility, the paper details two applications leveraging CAC: a fast consensus implementation optimized for low contention (named Cascading Consensus), and a novel naming problem that can be solved under full asynchrony. All algorithms presented require signatures.

Cite As Get BibTex

Timothé Albouy, Davide Frey, Mathieu Gestin, Michel Raynal, and François Taïani. Contention-Aware Cooperation. In 29th International Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems (OPODIS 2025). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 361, pp. 9:1-9:19, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.OPODIS.2025.9

Author Details

Timothé Albouy
  • IMDEA Software Institute, Madrid, Spain
Davide Frey
  • Univ Rennes, Inria, CNRS, IRISA, 35042 Rennes-cedex, France
Mathieu Gestin
  • CEA, Saclay, France
Michel Raynal
  • Univ Rennes, Inria, CNRS, IRISA, 35042 Rennes-cedex, France
François Taïani
  • Univ Rennes, Inria, CNRS, IRISA, 35042 Rennes-cedex, France

Funding

This work was partially supported by the French ANR projects ByBloS (ANR-20-CE25-0002-01) and PriCLeSS (ANR-10-LABX-07-81), and by the SOTERIA project. SOTERIA has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101018342. This content reflects only the author’s view. The European Agency is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

References

  1. Michael Abd-El-Malek, Gregory R. Ganger, Garth R. Goodson, Michael K. Reiter, and Jay J. Wylie. Fault-scalable Byzantine fault-tolerant services. Proc. 20th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP'05), 39:59-74, 2005. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1095810.1095817.
  2. Timothé Albouy, Davide Frey, Mathieu Gestin, Michel Raynal, and François Taïani. Contention aware cooperation. CoRR, abs/2311.08776, 2025. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.08776.
  3. Hagit Attiya, Antonella Del Pozzo, Alessia Milani, Ulysse Pavloff, and Alexandre Rapetti. The Synchronization Power of Auditable Registers. In Alysson Bessani, Xavier Défago, Junya Nakamura, Koichi Wada, and Yukiko Yamauchi, editors, 27th International Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems (OPODIS 2023), volume 286 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 4:1-4:23, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2024. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.OPODIS.2023.4.
  4. Hagit Attiya and Jennifer L. Welch. Multi-valued connected consensus: A new perspective on crusader agreement and adopt-commit. In OPODIS, volume 286 of LIPIcs, pages 6:1-6:23. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPICS.OPODIS.2023.6.
  5. Alex Auvolat, Davide Frey, Michel Raynal, and François Taïani. Money transfer made simple: a specification, a generic algorithm, and its proof. Bulletin of EATCS, 132:22-43, 2020. URL: http://eatcs.org/beatcs/index.php/beatcs/article/view/629.
  6. Michael Ben-Or. Another advantage of free choice (extended abstract): Completely asynchronous agreement protocols. In Proc. 2nd ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC'83), pages 27-30, 1983. Google Scholar
  7. Christian Berger, Lívio Rodrigues, Hans P. Reiser, Vinicius Cogo, and Alysson Bessani. Chasing lightspeed consensus: Fast wide-area Byzantine replication with mercury. In Middleware'24, pages 158-171. Association for Computing Machinery, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3652892.3700756.
  8. Zohir Bouzid, Achour Mostéfaoui, and Michel Raynal. Minimal synchrony for Byzantine consensus. In Proc. 34th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC'15), pages 461-470. ACM, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2767386.2767418.
  9. Gabriel Bracha and Sam Toueg. Asynchronous consensus and broadcast protocols. J. ACM, 32(4):824-840, 1985. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/4221.214134.
  10. Francisco Vilar Brasileiro, Fabíola Gréve, Achour Mostéfaoui, and Michel Raynal. Consensus in one communication step. In Proc. 6th International Conf. on Parallel Computing Technologies (PaCT'01), LNCS 2127, pages 42-50. Springer, 2001. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44743-1_4.
  11. Vitalik Buterin. Ethereum: A next-generation smart contract and decentralized application platform, 2014. Google Scholar
  12. Miguel Castro and Barbara Liskov. Practical Byzantine fault tolerance and proactive recovery. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst., 20(4):398-461, 2002. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/571637.571640.
  13. Tushar Deepak Chandra, Vassos Hadzilacos, and Sam Toueg. The weakest failure detector for solving consensus. J. ACM, 43(4):685-722, 1996. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/234533.234549.
  14. Daniel Collins, Rachid Guerraoui, Matteo Monti, Athanasios Xygkis, Matej Pavlovic, Petr Kuznetsov, Yvonne-Anne Pignolet, Dragos-Adrian Seredinschi, and Andrei Tonkikh. Online payments by merely broadcasting messages. In Proc. 50th Int'l Conference on Dependable Systems and Network (DSN20), pages 1-13. IEEE, 2020. Google Scholar
  15. James Cowling, Daniel Myers, Barbara Liskov, Rodrigo Rodrigues, and Liuba Shrira. HQ replication: A hybrid quorum protocol for Byzantine fault tolerance. In Proc. 7th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI'06), pages 177-190, 2006. URL: http://www.usenix.org/events/osdi06/tech/cowling.html.
  16. Danny Dolev. The Byzantine generals strike again. J. Algorithms, 3(1):14-30, 1982. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0196-6774(82)90004-9.
  17. Danny Dolev, Cynthia Dwork, and Larry J. Stockmeyer. On the minimal synchronism needed for distributed consensus. J. ACM, 34(1):77-97, 1987. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/7531.7533.
  18. Sisi Duan, Michael K. Reiter, and Haibin Zhang. BEAT: asynchronous BFT made practical. In Proc. 25th ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS'18), pages 2028-2041. ACM, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3243734.3243812.
  19. Cynthia Dwork, Nancy A. Lynch, and Larry J. Stockmeyer. Consensus in the presence of partial synchrony. J. ACM, 35(2):288-323, 1988. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/42282.42283.
  20. Paul Feldman and Silvio Micali. Optimal algorithms for byzantine agreement. In STOC, pages 148-161. ACM, 1988. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/62212.62225.
  21. Pesech Feldman and Silvio Micali. An optimal probabilistic protocol for synchronous Byzantine agreement. SIAM J. Comput., 26(4):873-933, 1997. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/S0097539790187084.
  22. Md. Sadek Ferdous, Audun Jøsang, Kuldeep Singh, and Ravishankar Borgaonkar. Security usability of petname systems. In Identity and Privacy in the Internet Age, pages 44-59, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04766-4_4.
  23. Michael J. Fischer, Nancy A. Lynch, and Michael S. Paterson. Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process. J. ACM, 32:374-382, 1985. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3149.214121.
  24. Sovrin Foundation. Sovrin: A protocol and token for self-sovereign identity and decentralized trust. Technical report, Sovrin Foundation, 2018. Google Scholar
  25. Davide Frey, Matthieu Gestin, and Michel Raynal. The synchronization power (consensus number) of access-control objects: the case of allowlist and denylist. In Proc. 37th Int'l Symposium on Distributed Computing (DISC'23), volume 281 of LIPICs, pages 21:1-21:23, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPICS.DISC.2023.21.
  26. Eli Gafni. Round-by-round fault detectors: Unifying synchrony and asynchrony (extended abstract). In Proc. 17th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC'98), pages 143-152. ACM, 1998. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/277697.277724.
  27. Mathieu Gestin. Privacy Preserving and fully-Distributed Identity Management Systems. PhD thesis, Université de Rennes, 2024. Google Scholar
  28. Yossi Gilad, Rotem Hemo, Silvio Micali, Georgios Vlachos, and Nickolai Zeldovich. Algorand: Scaling Byzantine agreements for cryptocurrencies. In Proceedings of the 26th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, Shanghai, China, October 28-31, 2017, SOSP '17, pages 51-68, New York, NY, USA, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3132747.3132757.
  29. Rachid Guerraoui, Petr Kuznetsov, Matteo Monti, Matej Pavlovič, and Dragos-Adrian Seredinschi. The consensus number of a cryptocurrency. Distributed Computing, 35:1-15, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/S00446-021-00399-2.
  30. P. Hoffman. Dns security extensions (dnssec), 2023. Google Scholar
  31. N Johnson and V Griffith. Ethereum name service, 2018. Google Scholar
  32. Harry A Kalodner, Miles Carlsten, Paul M Ellenbogen, Joseph Bonneau, and Arvind Narayanan. An empirical study of namecoin and lessons for decentralized namespace design. In WEIS, volume 1, pages 1-23, 2015. Google Scholar
  33. Lefteris Kokoris-Kogias, Alberto Sonnino, and George Danezis. Cuttlefish: Expressive fast path blockchains with fastunlock. CoRR, abs/2309.12715, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2309.12715.
  34. Ramakrishna Kotla, Lorenzo Alvisi, Mike Dahlin, Allen Clement, and Edmund Wong. Zyzzyva: speculative Byzantine fault tolerance. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles 2007, SOSP 2007, Stevenson, Washington, USA, October 14-17, 2007, SOSP '07, pages 45-58, 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1294261.1294267.
  35. Petr Kuznetsov, Andrei Tonkin, and Yan Zang. Revisiting optimal resilience of fast Byzantine consensus. In Proc. 40th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC'21), pages 343-353, 2021. Google Scholar
  36. Leslie Lamport. The part-time parliament. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst., 16(2):133-169, 1998. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/279227.279229.
  37. Leslie Lamport. Fast Paxos. Distributed Computing, 19:79-103, 2006. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/S00446-006-0005-X.
  38. Leslie Lamport. Lower bounds for asynchronous consensus. Distributed Computing, 19:104-125, 2006. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/S00446-006-0155-X.
  39. Leslie Lamport, Robert E. Shostak, and Marshall C. Pease. The Byzantine generals problem. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst., 4(3):382-401, 1982. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/357172.357176.
  40. Jean-Philippe Martin and Lorenzo Alvisi. Fast Byzantine consensus. IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput., 3(3):202-215, 2006. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/TDSC.2006.35.
  41. Andrew Miller, Yu Xia, Kyle Croman, Elaine Shi, and Dawn Song. The honey badger of BFT protocols. In Proc. 23rd ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS'16), pages 31-42, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2976749.2978399.
  42. Achour Mostéfaoui, Hamouma Moumen, and Michel Raynal. Signature-free asynchronous binary Byzantine consensus with t > n/3, o(n²) messages, and o(1) expected time. J. ACM, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2785953.
  43. Achour Mostéfaoui and Michel Raynal. Low cost consensus-based atomic broadcast. In Proc. 2000 Pacific Rim International Symposium on Dependable Computing (PRDC'00), pages 45-52. IEEE Computer Society, 2000. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/PRDC.2000.897283.
  44. Alexander Mühle, Andreas Grüner, Tatiana Gayvoronskaya, and Christoph Meinel. A survey on essential components of a self-sovereign identity. Computer Science Review, 30:80-86, November 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosrev.2018.10.002.
  45. Satoshi Nakamoto. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Technical report, Bitcoin, March 2009. URL: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf.
  46. Rafael Pass and Elaine Shi. Thunderella: Blockchains with optimistic instant confirmation. In Jesper Buus Nielsen and Vincent Rijmen, editors, Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT 2018, pages 3-33, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78375-8_1.
  47. Marshall Pease, Robert Shostak, and Leslie Lamport. Reaching agreement in the presence of faults. J. ACM, 27:228-234, 1980. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/322186.322188.
  48. Fernando Pedone and André Schiper. Optimistic atomic broadcast: a pragmatic viewpoint. Theor. Comput. Sci., 291(1):79-101, 2003. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3975(01)00397-8.
  49. HariGovind V. Ramasamy and Christian Cachin. Parsimonious asynchronous byzantine-fault-tolerant atomic broadcast. In Principles of Distributed Systems, pages 88-102, 2006. Google Scholar
  50. Michel Raynal. Concurrent programming: Algorithms, principles and foundations. Springer, 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32027-9.
  51. Michel Raynal. Fault-tolerant message-passing distributed systems: an algorithmic approach. Springer, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94141-7.
  52. Jakub Sliwinski, Yann Vonlanthen, and Roger Wattenhofer. Consensus on demand. In Proc. 24th Int'l Symposium on Stabilization, Safety, and Security of Distributed Systems, volume 13751 of LNCS, pages 299-313. Springer, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21017-4_20.
  53. Yee Jiun Song and Robbert van Renesse. Bosco: One-step Byzantine asynchronous consensus. In 22nd Int'l Symposium on Distributed Computing, volume 5218 of LNCS, pages 438-450. Springer, 2008. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87779-0_30.
  54. Gadi Taubenfeld. Synchronization algorithms and concurrent programming. Pearson Education/Prentice Hall, 2006. Google Scholar
  55. Andrei Tonkikh, Pavel Ponomarev, Petr Kuznetsov, and Yvonne-Anne Pignolet. Cryptoconcurrency: (almost) consensusless asset transfer with shared accounts. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, CCS '23, pages 1556-1570. Association for Computing Machinery, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3576915.3616587.
  56. Dennis Trautwein, Aravindh Raman, Gareth Tyson, Ignacio Castro, Will Scott, Moritz Schubotz, Bela Gipp, and Yiannis Psaras. Design and evaluation of ipfs: a storage layer for the decentralized web. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2022 Conference, SIGCOMM ’22, pages 739-752. ACM, August 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3544216.3544232.
  57. Bret Victor. Tripphrases. http://worrydream.com/tripphrase/, 2008. Accessed: 2023-12-11.
  58. Daniel Shawcross Wilkerson. A proposal for Proquints: Identifiers that are readable, spellable, and pronounceable. CoRR, abs/0901.4016, 2009. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/0901.4016.
  59. Jiong Yang, Gil Neiger, and Eli Gafni. Structured derivations of consensus algorithms for failure detectors. In PODC, pages 297-306. ACM, 1998. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/277697.277755.
  60. Piotr Zielinski. Optimistically terminating consensus: All asynchronous consensus protocols in one framework. In Proc. 5th Int'l Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Computing (ISPDC'06), pages 24-33. IEEE Computer Society, 2006. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/ISPDC.2006.37.
Any Issues?
X

Feedback on the Current Page

CAPTCHA

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted to Dagstuhl Publishing

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact