The Journal of Supercomputing

, Volume 71, Issue 4, pp 1587–1603 | Cite as

Byzantine consensus for unknown dynamic networks



In a distributed system, each solution for the problem of Byzantine agreement requires that some of the correct processes reach a common decision value from a set of proposed values while Byzantine processes may behave arbitrarily. While the problem has been widely studied in fully connected fixed networks, few studies have been carried out in the context of self-organizing mobile networks such as mobile ad hoc networks. We present a randomized consensus protocol with three additional modules for the case of dynamic networks: participant detectors, failure detectors and maintainer. We assume an asynchronous network with unknown participants where processes can be fixed or move continuously for departing or joining the network. We suppose that the channels are fair-lossy and the number of processes is unknown. In comparison with the related works, our system model is weaker which is more realistic. Also, the proposed protocol is more scalable and satisfies the strongest possible mobility condition in Byzantine agreement. Our experiments and case studies show that the number of execution rounds is significantly less than what is expected in the theoretical analysis.


Byzantine agreement Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus  Self-organizing systems 


  1. 1.
    Pease M, Shostak R, Lamport L (1980) Reaching agreement in the presence of faults. J ACM (JACM) 27(2):228–234CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pease M, Shostak R, Lamport L (1982) The Byzantine generals problem. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst 4(3):382–401CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Correia M, Veronese GS, Neves NF, Verissimo P (2011) Byzantine consensus in asynchronous message-passing systems: a survey. Int J Crit Comput Based Syst 2(2):141–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wang SS, Yan K-Q, Wang S-C (2010) An optimal solution for Byzantine agreement under a hierarchical. Comput Electric Eng (Elsevier) 36(1):100–113CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chiang M-L (2012) Eventually Byzantine agreement on CDS-based mobile ad hoc network. Ad Hoc Netw 10(3):388–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Krings A, Feyer T (1999) The Byzantine agreement problem: optimal early stopping. In: Proceedings of the 32nd annual Hawaii international conference on systems sciences, 1999, HICSS-32, MauiGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wu J (2002) Extended dominating-set-based routing in ad hoc wireless networks with unidirectional links. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 13(9):866–881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Borran F, Prakash R, Schiper A (2008) Extending Paxos/LastVoting with an adequate communication layer for wireless ad hoc networks. In: Proceedings of the symposium on reliable distributed systems, SRDS, pp 227–236Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Charron-Bost B, Schiper A (2009) The heard-of model: computing in distributed systems with benign faults. Distribut Comput DC 22(1):49–71CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Arabnia HR, Bhandarkar SM (1996) Parallel stereocorrelation on a reconfigurable multi-ring network. J Supercomput 10(3):243–269CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bhandarkar SM, Arabnia HR (1995) The REFINE multiprocessor: theoretical properties and algorithms. J Parallel Comput 21(11):1783–1805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cavin D, Sasson Y, Schiper A (2004) Consensus with unknown participants or fundamental self-organization, ad-hoc networks and wireless. In: Proceedings of the third international conference, ADHOC-NOW 2004, Vancouver, 22–24 July 2004, pp 135–148Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cavin D, Sasson Y, Schiper A (2005) Reaching agreement with unknown participants in mobile self-organized networks in spite of process crashes. In: EPFL—LSR research reportGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Greve F, Tixeuil S (2007) Knowledge connectivity vs. synchrony requirements for fault- tolerant agreement in unknown networks. In: 37th annual iEEE/IFIP international conference on dependable systems and networks, 2007, DSN ’07, pp 82–91, 25–28 June 2007Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Greve F, Tixeuil S (2010) Conditions for the solvability of fault-tolerant consensus in asynchronous unknown networks. In: Proceedings of the third international workshop on reliability, availability, and security, WRAS ’10Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Alchieri EAP, Bessani AN, Fraga JdS, Greve F (2008) Byzantine consensus with unknown participants, principles of distributed systems. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference, OPODIS 2008, vol 5401, pp 22–40, Luxor, 15–18 December 2008Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tsai J, Chang C-C (2010) A weaker knowledge connectivity condition sufficient for fault-tolerant consensus with unknown participants. In: Proceeding of the international computer software and applications conference, COMPSAC, pp 273–278Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fisher M, Lynch N, Paterson M (1985) Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process. J ACM 32(2):374–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Costa V, Greve F (2008) Implementing fault-tolerant consensus over unknown networks. In: 7th international information and telecommunication technologies symposiumGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moniz H, Neves NF, Correia M, Veríssimo P (2006) Experimental comparison of local and shared coin randomized consensus protocols. In: Proceeding, reliable distributed systems, 2006. 25th IEEE symposium on SRDS ’06, pp 235–244Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bracha G (1984) An asynchronous (n-1)/3-resilient consensus protocol. In: Proceedings of the third annual ACM symposium on principles of distributed computing, pp 154–162Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cachin C, Kursawe K, Shoup V (2000) Random oracles in constantinople: practical asynchronous Byzantine agreement using cryptography. In: 19th ACM symposium on principles of distributed computing (PODC)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mostefaoui A, Mourgaya E, Raynal M (2003) Asynchronous implementation of failure detectors. In: Proceedings of the international IEEE conference on dependable systems and networks (DSN’03), pp 351–360Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Greve F, Sens P, Arantes L, Simon V (2012) Eventually strong failure detector with unknown membership. Comput J 55(12):1507–1524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lynch, N.: Distributed algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1997)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wanga S-C, Yanb K-Q (2006) Byzantine agreement under dual failure mobile network. Comput Stand Interfaces (Elsevier) 28(4):475–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cornejo A, Lynch N, Viqar S, Welch JL (2009) Neighbor discovery in mobile ad hoc networks using an abstract MAC layer. In: Annual Allerton conference on communication, control, and computing, Allerton, MonticelloGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cornejo A, Viqar S, Welch JL (2010) Reliable neighbor discovery for mobile ad hoc networks. In: Proceeding DIALM-POMC ’10, Proceedings of the 6th international workshop on foundations of mobile computing, pp 259–277Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chandra TD, Hadzilacos V, Toueg S (1996) The weakest failure detector for solving consensus. J ACM 43(4):685–722CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chandra TD, Toueg S (1996) Unreliable failure detectors for reliable distributed systems. J ACM 43(2):225–267CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lamport L (1978) Time, clocks, and the ordering of events in a distributed system. Commun ACM 21(7):558–565CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Moniz H, Neves NF, Correia aM (2010) Turquois: Byzantine consensus in wireless ad hoc networks. In: Dependable systems and networks—DSN, pp 537–546Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Awerbuch B, Holmer D, Nita-Rotaru C, Rubens H (2002) An on-demand secure routing protocol resilient to byzantine failures. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM workshop on wireless security, WiSE ’02, pp 21–30Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Casteigts A, Flocchini P, Quattrociocchi W, Santoro N (2011) Time-varying graphs and dynamic networks. In: Proceeding of the 10th international conference on ad hoc networks and wireless (ADHOC-NOW’11), pp 346–359Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer EngineeringSharif University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations