Advertisement

Typing Mobility in the Seal Calculus

  • Giuseppe Castagna
  • Giorgio Ghelli
  • Francesco Zappa Nardelli
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2154)

Abstract

The issue of this work is how to type mobility, in the sense that we tackle the problem of typing not only mobile agents but also their movement. This yields higher-order types for agents. To that end we first provide a new definition of the Seal Calculus that gets rid of existing inessential features while preserving the distinctive characteristics of the Seal model. Then we discuss the use of interfaces to type agents and define the type system. This type system induces a new interpretation of the types: interfaces describe interaction effects rather than, as it is customary, provided services. We discuss at length the difference of the two interpretations and justify our choice of the former.

Keywords

Type System Mobile Agent Typing Rule Mobility Attribute Subtyping Relation 
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.
    R. Amadio, G. Boudol, and C. Lhoussaine. The receptive distributed π-calculus. In FST&TCS, number 1738 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 304–315, 1999.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    C. Bryce and J. Vitek. The JavaSeal mobile agent kernel. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 2002. To appear.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Bugliesi and G. Castagna. Secure safe ambients. In Proc. of the 28th ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 222–235, London, 2001. ACM Press.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    L. Cardelli, G. Ghelli, and A. Gordon. Mobility types for mobile ambients. In Proceedings of ICALP’99, number 1644 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 230–239. Springer, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    L. Cardelli, G. Ghelli, and A. D. Gordon. Ambient groups and mobility types. In International Conference IFIP TCS, number 1872 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 333–347. Springer, August 2000.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. Cardelli and A. Gordon. Mobile ambients. In Proceedings of POPL’98. ACM Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L. Cardelli and A. Gordon. Types for mobile ambients. In Proceedings of POPL’ 99, pages 79–92. ACM Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Hennessy and J. Riely. Resource access control in systems of mobile agents. Information and Computation, 2000. To appear.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    F. Levi and D. Sangiorgi. Controlling interference in Ambients. In POPL’ 00, pages 352–364. ACM Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Merro. Locality in the π-calculus and applications to distributed objects. PhD thesis, Ecole de Mines de Paris, October 2000.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Milner, J. Parrow, and D. Walker. A calculus of mobile processes, Parts I and II. Information and Computation, 100:1–77, September 1992.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Robin Milner. The polyadic π-calculus: a tutorial. Technical Report ECS-LFCS-91-180, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, UK, October 1991. Appeared in Proceedings of the International Summer School on Logic and Algebra of Specification, Marktoberdorf, August 1991. Reprinted in Logic and Algebra of Specification, ed. F. L. Bauer, W. Brauer, and H. Schwichtenberg, Springer-Verlag, 1993.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Odersky and P. Wadler. Pizza into Java: Translating theory into practice. In 24th Ann. ACM Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, 1997.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. Parrow and B. Victor. The Fusion Calculus: Expressiveness and symmetry in mobile processes. In Logic in Computer Science. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. Pierce and D. Sangiorgi. Typing and subtyping for mobile processes. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science, 6(5), 1996.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. Sangiorgi. The name discipline of uniform receptiveness. Theoretical Computer Science, 221(1–2):457–493, 1999.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    P. Sewell and J. Vitek. Secure composition of insecure components. In 12th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop, 1999.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Vitek, C. Bryce, and W. Binder. Designing JavaSeal: or how to make Java safe for agents. In Dennis Tsichritzis, editor, Electronic Commerce Objects. University of Geneva, 1998.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Vitek and G. Castagna. Seal: A framework for secure mobile computations. In Internet Programming Languages, number 1686 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    N. Yoshida and M. Hennessy. Assigning types to processes. In Proceedings, Fifteenth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 334–348, 2000.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    F. Zappa Nardelli. Types for Seal Calculus. Master’s thesis, Universita degli Studi di Pisa, October 2000. Available at ftp://ftp.di.ens.fr/pub/users/zappa/readings/mt.ps.gz.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giuseppe Castagna
    • 1
  • Giorgio Ghelli
    • 2
  • Francesco Zappa Nardelli
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.c.n.r.s., D’epartement d’Informatique’Ecole Normale Sup’erieureParisFrance
  2. 2.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversit’a di PisaPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations