Uniform deterministic self-stabilizing ring-orientation on odd-length rings

  • Jaap-Henk Hoepman
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 857)


The ring-orientation problem requires all processors on an anonymous ring to reach agreement on a direction along the ring. A self-stabilizing ring-orientation protocol eventually ensures that all processors on the ring agree on a direction, regardless of the initial states of the processors on which the protocol is started. In this paper we present two uniform deterministic self-stabilizing ring-orientation protocols for rings with an odd number of processors using only a constant number of states per processor. The first protocol is an adaption of a randomized protocol presented by Israeli and Jalfon [IJ93], and operates in the link-register model under the distributed daemon. The second protocol operates in the state-reading model under the central daemon, and complements the impossibility results proven in [IJ93]. Applying our results we are able to prove that under the central daemon on an odd-length ring, the link register model and the state-reading model are equivalent in the sense that a self-stabilizing protocol for the one model can be transformed to an equivalent protocol in the other model.


Rings Orientation Self-Stabilization Communication Synchronization Shared Memory Symmetry Breaking 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [ASW88]
    Hagit Attiya, Marc Snir, and Manfred K. Warmuth. Computing on an anonymous ring. Journal of the ACM, 35(4):845–875, Oct. 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [BP89]
    James E. Burns and Jan Pachl. Uniform self-stabilizing rings. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 11(2):330–344, Apr. 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [Bur87]
    James E. Burns. Self-stabilizing rings without demons. Technical Report GIT-ICS-87/36, School of Information and Computer Science, Georgia Institute of Technology, Nov. 1987.Google Scholar
  4. [Dij74]
    Edsger W. Dijkstra. Self-stabilizing systems in spite of distributed control. Communications of the ACM, 17(11):643–644, Nov. 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [Dij82]
    Edsger W. Dijkstra. Self-stabilization in spite of distributed control. In Selected Writings on Computing: A Personal Perspective, pages 41–46. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1982.Google Scholar
  6. [DIM93]
    Shlomi Dolev, Amos Israeli, and Shlomo Moran. Self-stabilization of dynamic systems assuming only read/write atomicity. Distributed Computing, 7(1): 3–16, Nov. 1993.Google Scholar
  7. [GHR90]
    Mohamed G. Gouda, Rodney R. Howell, and Louis E. Rosier. The instability of self-stabilization. Acta Informatica, 27(8):697–724, 1990.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. [IJ93]
    Amos Israeli and Marc Jalfon. Uniform self-stabilizing ring orientation. Information and Computation, 104(2):175–196, June 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [LV93]
    Nancy A. Lynch and Frits W. Vaandrager. Forward and backward simulations. Part I: Untimed systems. Technical Report CS-R9313, Center for Mathematics and Computer Science (CWI), Amsterdam, Mar. 1993.Google Scholar
  10. [San84]
    Nicola Santoro. Sense of direction, topological awareness and communication complexity. ACM SIGACT News, 16(2):50–56, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jaap-Henk Hoepman
    • 1
  1. 1.CWIGB AmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations