Distributed reachability analysis for protocol verification environments

  • Sudhir Aggarwal
  • Rafael Alonso
  • Costas Courcoubetis
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences book series (LNCIS, volume 103)


A topic of importance in the area of distributed algorithms is the efficient implementation of formal verification techniques. Many such techniques are based on coupled finite state machine models, and reachability analysis is central to their implementation. SPANNER is an environment developed at AT&T Bell Laboratories, and is based on the selection/resolution model (S/R) of coupled finite state machines. It can be used for the formal specification and verification of computer communication protocols. In SPANNER, protocols are specified as coupled finite state machines, and analyzed by proving properties of the joint behavior of these machines. In this last step, reachability analysis is used in order to generate the “product” machine from its components, and constitutes the most time consuming part of the verification process. In this paper we investigate aspects of distributing reachability over a local area network of workstations, in order to reduce the time needed to complete the calculation. A key property which we exploit in our proposed design is that the two basic operations performed during reachability, the new state generation, and the state tabulation, can be performed asynchronously, and to some degree independently. Furthermore, each of these operations can be decomposed into concurrent subtasks. We provide a description of the distributed reachability algorithm we are currently in the process of implementing in SPANNER, and an investigation of the scheduling problems we face.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [ABM86]
    S. Aggarwal, D. Barbara and K. Meth, “Specifying and analyzing protocols with SPANNER”, Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications, June 22–25, 1986, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
  2. [ABM87]
    S. Aggarwal, D. Barbara and K. Meth, “SPANNER-A tool for the specification, analysis and evaluation of protocols”, to appear in IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 1987.Google Scholar
  3. [ABM88]
    S. Aggarwal, D. Barbara and K. Meth, “A software environment for the specification and analysis of problems of coordination and concurrency”, to appear in the IEEE Trans. on Software Eng., 1988.Google Scholar
  4. [AC85]
    S. Aggarwal and C. Courcoubetis, “Distributed implementation of a model of communication and computation”, Proc. of the 18th Hawaii Int. Conf. on System Sciences, January 1985, pp. 206–218.Google Scholar
  5. [ACW86]
    S. Aggarwal, C. Courcoubetis and P. Wolper, “Adding liveness properties to coupled finite state machines”, AT&T Bell Laboratories Technical Memo., 1986.Google Scholar
  6. [AK84]
    S. Aggarwal and R. Kurshan, “Automated implementation from formal specifications”, Protocol Specification, Testing, and Verification IV, (Y. Yemini and al. eds.), North Holland, 1984.Google Scholar
  7. [AKS83]
    S. Aggarwal, R. Kurshan, and K. Sabnani, “A calculus for protocol specification and validation”, Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification III, H. Rudin and C. West (Eds.), North Holland, 1983.Google Scholar
  8. [An86]
    J. P. Ansart, et al., “Software tools for Estelle”, Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification VI, B. Sarikaya and G. Bochman (Eds.), North Holland, 1986, pp. 55–62.Google Scholar
  9. [Bo87]
    G. V. Bochmann, “Usage of protocol development tools: the results of a survey”, Proceedings of the 7th IFIP workshop on Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification, Zurich, May 5–8, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. [CE82]
    E. M. Clarke, E. A. Emerson, “Synthesis of synchronization skeletons from branching time temporal logic”, Proc. Logic of Programs Workshop, 1981, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci. 131, Springer-Verlag, 1982, 52–71.Google Scholar
  11. [CG86]
    D. Cohen, B. Gopinath, et al., “IC*: An environment for specifying complex systems”, Proc. IEEE GLOBECOM Conf., Houston, Dec. 1986, pp. 632–637.Google Scholar
  12. [F187]
    A. Fleischmann, “PASS-A Technique for specifying communication protocols”, Proceedings of the 7th IFIP workshop on Prorocol Specification, Testing and Verification, Zurich, May 5–8, 1987.Google Scholar
  13. [GK82]
    B. Gopinath and R. Kurshan, “The selection/resolution model for concurrent processes”, unpublished.Google Scholar
  14. [GK87]
    I. Gertner, R. P. Kurshan, “Logical analysis of digital circuits”, Proc. 8th Int'l. Conf. Computer Hardware Description Languages, 1987, 47–67.Google Scholar
  15. [Po80a]
    J. Postel, “DOD Standard Transmission Protocol,” RFC 761, Information Sciences Institute, January 1980.Google Scholar
  16. [Po80b]
    J. Postel, “DOD Standard Internet Protocol,” RFC 760, Information Sciences Institute, January 1980.Google Scholar
  17. [QS82]
    J. P. Queille, J. Sifakis, “Specification and verification of concurrent systems in CESAR, International Symposium in Programming, LNCS 137, 1982.Google Scholar
  18. [RT78]
    D. Ritchie and K. Thompson, “UNIX Time-Sharing System,” Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 57, Number 6, 1978.Google Scholar
  19. [Su81]
    C. A. Sunshine, (ed.), Communication Protocol Modelling, Artech House, 1981.Google Scholar
  20. [Sun86]
    “Inter-Process Communication Primer,” Sun Microsystems User Documentation, Revision B of February 17, 1986.Google Scholar
  21. [ZWRCB80]
    P. Zafiropoulo, C. H. West, H. Rudin, D. D. Cowan and D. Brand, “Towards analyzing and synthrsizing protocols”, IEEE Trans. on Comm., COM-28, 4 (April 1980), pp. 651–660.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sudhir Aggarwal
    • 1
  • Rafael Alonso
    • 2
  • Costas Courcoubetis
    • 3
  1. 1.Bell Communications ResearchMorristown
  2. 2.Department of Computer SciencePrinceton UniversityPrinceton
  3. 3.AT&T Bell LaboratoriesMurray Hill

Personalised recommendations