Advertisement

A Theory of System Behaviour in the Presence of Node and Link Failures

  • Adrian Francalanza
  • Matthew Hennessy
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3653)

Abstract

We develop a behavioural theory of distributed programs in the presence of failures such as nodes crashing and links breaking. The framework we use is that of Dπ, a language in which located processes, or agents, may migrate between dynamically created locations. In our extended framework, these processes run on a distributed network, in which individual nodes may crash in fail-stop fashion or the links between these nodes may become permanently broken. The original language, Dπ, is also extended by a ping construct for detecting and reacting to these failures.

We define a bisimulation equivalence between these systems, based on labelled actions which record, in addition to the effect actions have on the processes, the effect on the actual state of the underlying network and the view of this state known to observers. We prove that the equivalence is fully abstract, in the sense that two systems will be differentiated if and only if, in some sense, there is a computational context, consisting of a surrounding network and an observer, which can see the difference.

Keywords

Mobile Agent Network Representation Link Failure Behavioural Theory Label Transition System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Amadio, R.M.: An asynchronous model of locality, failure, and process mobility. In: Garlan, D., Le Métayer, D. (eds.) COORDINATION 1997. LNCS, vol. 1282, pp. 374–391. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amadio, R.M., Prasad, S.: Localities and failures. In: Thiagarajan, P.S. (ed.) FSTTCS 1994. LNCS, vol. 880. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berger, M.: Basic theory of reduction congruence for two timed asynchronous π-calculi. In: Gardner, P., Yoshida, N. (eds.) CONCUR 2004. LNCS, vol. 3170, pp. 115–130. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cardelli, L.: Wide area computation. In: Wiedermann, J., Van Emde Boas, P., Nielsen, M. (eds.) ICALP 1999. LNCS, vol. 1644, pp. 10–24. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chandra, T.D., Toueg, S.: Unreliable failure detectors for reliable distributed systems. Journal of the ACM 43(2), 225–267 (1996)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Nicola, R., Gorla, D., Pugliese, R.: Basic observables for a calulus for global computing. Technical report, Universita di Firenze (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fournet, C., Gonthier, G., Levy, J.J., Didier, R.: A calculus of mobile agents. In: Sassone, V., Montanari, U. (eds.) CONCUR 1996. LNCS, vol. 1119, pp. 406–421. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Francalanza, A., Hennessy, M.: Location and link failure in a distributed π-calculus. Technical report, 2005:01, University of Sussex (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    van Glabbeek, R.J., Goltz, U.: Equivalence notions for concurrent systems and refinement of actions. In: Kreczmar, A., Mirkowska, G. (eds.) MFCS 1989. LNCS, vol. 379, pp. 237–248. Springer, Heidelberg (1989)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hennessy, M., Merro, M., Rathke, J.: Towards a behavioural theory of access and mobility control in distributed systems. Theoretical Computer Science 322, 615–669 (2004)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hennessy, M., Rathke, J.: Typed behavioural equivalences for processes in the presence of subtyping. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 14, 651–684 (2004)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hennessy, M., Riely, J.: Resource access control in systems of mobile agents. Information and Computation 173, 82–120 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Honda, K., Yoshida, N.: On reduction-based process semantics. Theoretical Computer Science 152(2), 437–486 (1995)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nestmann, U., Fuzzati, R., Merro, M.: Modeling consensus in a process calculus. In: Amadio, R.M., Lugiez, D. (eds.) CONCUR 2003. LNCS, vol. 2761, pp. 399–414. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Riely, J., Hennessy, M.: Distributed processes and location failures. Theoretical Computer Science 226, 693–735 (2001)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sangiorgi, D., Walker, D.: The π-calculus. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adrian Francalanza
    • 1
  • Matthew Hennessy
    • 1
  1. 1.University of SussexFalmer BrightonEngland

Personalised recommendations