Advertisement

An Efficient Consensus Protocol for Real-Time Permissioned Blockchains Under Non-Byzantine Conditions

  • Gengrui ZhangEmail author
  • Chengzhong XuEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11204)

Abstract

Blockchains are increasingly used in the collaboration between business as a trusted distributed ledger. Coping with massive data transactions raises the requirement of real-time safety of blockchains. The celebrated Raft protocol has limitations of being a consensus protocol for permissioned blockchains where a strong consistency is needed between clients and servers. In this work, we propose a new consensus protocol called Dynasty which ensures the real-time safety and the liveness under all non-Byzantine conditions. We design and implement a three-layer permissioned blockchain framework which tolerates f failures with 2f + 1 correct servers based on Dynasty. We demonstrate the blockchain as a service in an application of used-vehicle trading management and evaluate the performance of the blockchain framework in terms of throughput and latency. Experimental results show that while the latency in different scales of the system increases as expected, the number of committed transactions per second stabilizes at a point within less than 8% difference after a warming-up period.

Notes

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and valuable suggestions. This work was supported by the China National Basic Research Program (973 Program, No. 2015CB352400), NSFC under grant U1401258, Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province (2015B010129011, 2015A030310326), the Basic Research Program of Shenzhen (JCYJ20150630114942313).

References

  1. 1.
    Aspnes, J.: Randomized protocols for asynchronous consensus. Distrib. Comput. 16(2), 165–175 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bentov, I., Lee, C., Mizrahi, A., Rosenfeld, M.: Proof of activity: Extending bitcoin’s proof of work via proof of stake (extended abstract). ACM SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev. 42(3), 34–37 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bolosky, W.J., Bradshaw, D., Haagens, R.B., Kusters, N.P., Li, P.: Paxos replicated state machines as the basis of a high-performance data store. In: Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI), pp. 141–154 (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brown, R.G.: Introducing R3 Corda: a distributed ledger designed for finanial services, 2016 (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cachin, C.: Architecture of the hyperledger blockchain fabric. In: Workshop on Distributed Cryptocurrencies and Consensus Ledgers (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Castro, M., Liskov, B., et al.: Practical byzantine fault tolerance. In: OSDI, vol. 99, pp. 173–186 (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chandra, T.D., Griesemer, R., Redstone, J.: Paxos made live: an engineering perspective. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 398–407. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    Dinh, T.T.A., Wang, J., Chen, G., Liu, R., Ooi, B.C., Tan, K.L.: Blockbench: a framework for analyzing private blockchains. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Conference on Management of Data, pp. 1085–1100. ACM (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eyal, I., Gencer, A.E., Sirer, E.G., Van Renesse, R.: Bitcoin-NG: a scalable blockchain protocol. In: NSDI, pp. 45–59 (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fischer, M.J., Lynch, N.A., Paterson, M.S.: Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process. J. ACM (JACM) 32(2), 374–382 (1985)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Iansiti, M., Lakhani, K.R.: The truth about blockchain. Harv. Bus. Rev. 95(1), 118–127 (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    King, S., Nadal, S.: PPCoin: peer-to-peer crypto-currency with proof-of-stake. Self-published paper, 19 August 2012Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lamport, L., Shostak, R., Pease, M.: The byzantine generals problem. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. (TOPLAS) 4(3), 382–401 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lamport, L., et al.: Paxos made simple. ACM SIGACT News 32(4), 18–25 (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lampson, B.: The ABCD’s of paxos. In: PODC, vol. 1, p. 13 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liu, S., Viotti, P., Cachin, C., Quema, V., Vukolic, M.: XFT: practical fault tolerance beyond crashes. In: OSDI, pp. 485–500 (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ongaro, D., Ousterhout, J.K.: In search of an understandable consensus algorithm. In: USENIX Annual Technical Conference, pp. 305–319 (2014)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schwartz, D., Youngs, N., Britto, A.: The ripple protocol consensus algorithm. Ripple Labs Inc White Paper 5 (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vukolić, M.: The quest for scalable blockchain fabric: proof-of-work vs. BFT replication. In: Camenisch, J., Kesdoğan, D. (eds.) iNetSec 2015. LNCS, vol. 9591, pp. 112–125. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39028-4_9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wood, G.: Ethereum: a secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger. Ethereum Project Yellow Paper 151 (2014)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhang, G.: Transaction based blockchains. https://github.com/thatisedward/Transaction-Based-Blockchain

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced TechnologyChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  2. 2.Shenzhen College of Advanced TechnologyUniversity of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations