Using adaptive timeouts to achieve at-most-once message delivery
We extend the at-most-once message delivery algorithm of Liskov, Shrira, and Wroclawski to adapt dynamically to changes in message transmission time and degree of clock synchronization. The performance of their algorithm depends on its being supplied with a good estimate of the maximum message lifetime — the sum of the message delivery time and the difference in processor clock values between sender and recipient. We present two algorithms that are suitable for use in a system where the message lifetime is unknown or may change. Our extensions allow the automatic and continuous determination of a suitable value for the maximum lifetime. We prove that whenever the actual message lifetime is bounded, then our adaptive algorithms converge to an accurate estimate of its true value. Our two algorithms differ in the behavior they require from the network and achieve different performance levels. Our formal statement of convergence is expressed in terms of the number of messages received, rather than time elapsed. We show that this formulation is necessary by proving that no method for estimating the lifetime can achieve convergence in a bounded amount of time.
Key wordsAt-most-once message delivery Communication algorithms Synchronized clocks Adaptive algorithms
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Comer D: Internetworking with TCP/IP: principles, protocols, and architecture. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs 1988Google Scholar
- 3.Jain R: Divergence of timeout algorithms for packet retransmissions. Proc. 5th Annual International Phoenix Conference on Computers and Communications 1986, pp 174–179Google Scholar
- 6.Liskov B: Practical uses of synchronized clocks. Proc 10th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing 1991, pp 1 9Google Scholar
- 9.Steiner JG, Neuman BC, Schiller JI: Kerberos: an authentication service for open network systems. Usenix Conference Proceedings 1988, pp 191–202Google Scholar
- 10.Zhang L: Why TCP timers don’t work well. Proc ACM SIG-COMM Symposium 1986, pp 397–405Google Scholar