A method for verifying liveness of protocols modeled as a class of ECFSM

  • M. Higuchi
  • S. Sugawa
  • M. Fujii
Chapter
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT)

Abstract

In a previous work, we proposed a method for verifying safety of communication protocols modeled as two extended communicating finite-state machines with two unbounded FIFO channels connecting them. This paper presents a method for verifying liveness based on the above method. Liveness is formulated as Q-liveness which states “∀gs ∈ RS ∃gs′ ∈ GS Q {gs′ is reachable from gs}”, where RS and GS Q denote the set of reachable global states and the set of global states satisfying the property Q, respectively. In the proposed verification method, a finite degenerated reachability graph, DRG, of a given protocol is constructed. In DRG, each node represents a subset of reachable states, and if there exists an edge from a node υ i to another node υ j , where υ i and υ j represent subsets of reachable states RS i and RS j respectively, then “∀gs ∈ RS i ∃gs′ ∈ RS j {gs′ is reachable from gs}” holds. By exploring DRG, Q-liveness is shown to hold. An experimental result on verifying liveness of a sample protocol extracted from the data transfer phase of the OSI session protocol, is also described to show the effectiveness of the verification method.

Keyword Codes

C.2.2 D.2.4 

Keywords

Network Protocol Program Verification 
Download to read the full chapter text

References

  1. [1]
    Lin,F.J. et al.: “Protocol Verification Using Reachability Analysis: The State Space Explosion Problem and Relief Strategies”, Proc. ACM SIGCOMM’87, pp.126135 (1987).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Brand,D. and Zafiropulo,P.: “On Communicating Finite-State Machines”, JA CM,vol.30, no.2, pp.323–342(1983).Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Yuang,M.C. and Kershebaum,A.: “Parallel Protocol Verification: The Two-Phase Algorithm” Proc. 9th PST V,pp.339–353(1989–06).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Clarke,E.M. et al.: “Automatic Verification of Finite-State Concurrent System Using Temporal Logic Specification”, ACM Trans.PLS, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 244–263 (1986).MATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Hoperoft,J.E. and Ullman,J.D.: “Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation”, Addison-Wesley (1979).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Gouda, M.G.: “Closed Covers: to Verify Progress for Communicating Finite-State Machines”, IEEE Trans. SE,vol.10, no.11, pp.846–855(1984–11).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Pachl,J.: “Protocol Description and Analysis Based on a State Transition Model with Channel Expressions”, Proc. 7th PSTV,pp.207–219(1987–05).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Finkel,A.: “A New Class of Analyzable CFSMs with Unbounded FIFO Channels”, Proc. 8th PSTV, pp. 283–294 (1988).Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Higuchi,M. et al.: “A Verification Method via Invariant for Communication Protocols Modeled as Extended Communicating Finite-State Machines”, IEICE Trans. Commun.,vol.E-76B, no.11, pp.1363–1372 (1993–11).Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Higuchi,M. et al.: “A Verification Procedure via Invariant for Extended Communicating Finite-State Machines”, Proc. of 4th Workshop on CAV pp.359–370(1992–07).Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Cormen,T.H., Leiserson,C.E. and Rivest,R.L.: “Introduction to Algorithms”, The MIT Press, pp. 539–543 (1990).Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    ISO: “Basic Connection Oriented Session Protocol Specification”, ISO 8327.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Higuchi
    • 1
  • S. Sugawa
    • 1
  • M. Fujii
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Information and Computer SciencesOsaka UniversityToyonaka, Osaka 560Japan

Personalised recommendations