1 / 16

Self-stabilization in NEST

Self-stabilization in NEST. Mikhail Nesterenko (based on presentation by Anish Arora, Ohio State University). Goals. Scalable dependability via new notions of stabilization e.g. weak, protective, bounded stabilization Stabilization at all levels of NEST system stack

urvi
Download Presentation

Self-stabilization in NEST

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Self-stabilization in NEST Mikhail Nesterenko (based on presentation by Anish Arora, Ohio State University)

  2. Goals Scalable dependability via new notions of stabilization • e.g. weak, protective, bounded stabilization Stabilization at all levels of NEST system stack • e.g., at application level, via component-frameworks and automated synthesis • e.g., at middleware level, via stabilizing monitoring

  3. Stabilization Notions: Original Concept illegitimate states reached possibly due to faults legitimate states from where safety and liveness are satisfied • Closure: Set of legitimate states is closed under system execution • Convergence: Starting from any system state, every system computation eventually reaches a legitimate state

  4. Weak Stabilization • Closure • Weak Convergence: Starting from any system state, some system computation eventually reaches a legitimate state

  5. Protective Stabilization • Closure • Convergence (strong or weak) • Protection: No transition is unsafe ( )

  6. Bounded Stabilization • Closure • Bounded Convergence: • Set of fault-span states is closed under system execution • Starting from any fault-span state, every system computation reaches a legitimate state in bounded time Fault-span states, convergence time is bounded

  7. AP Timed AP APC Stabilization in NEST System Stack synthesis Nonstabilizing application Stabilizing application Stabilization synthesis framework component framework Implementing stabilizing apps Stabilizing system/app monitoring

  8. Project: Stabilizing Monitoring Service Model: • apps/daemons/nodes periodically send a refresh to service • period is chosen within some interval [LF .. HF] Service ensures in stabilizing manner: • apps/daemons/nodes are up • monitoring service of a node is up

  9. Layered Architecture Layer 0: Hardware watchdog • implements a hardware self-rebooting mechanism Layer 1: Basic monitoring • ensures that registered app/daemons are up Layer 2: Remote and Advanced monitoring • ensures other nodes and distributed process groups are up • generation of suspicions for dependent apps/daemons • adaptation of refresh periods & registered apps/daemons

  10. Project: Implementing Stabilizing Applications Input: a (weakly-) stabilizing protocol consisting of processes communicating via messages in Abstract Protocol (AP) notation Output: a weakly-stabilizing implementation using UNIX processes and UDP communication

  11. Approach Input • Abstract timeouts • Zero message delay • Action/fault atomicity • Action fairness AP preserves all safety and liveness properties • Real timeouts • Non-zero message delay • Action/fault atomicity • Action fairness Timed AP preserves some properties, including weak-stabilization • Real timeouts • Non-zero message delay • Event/weak fault atomicity • Weak action fairness APC Output

  12. Project: Stabilization Synthesis Framework synthesis procedure Nonstabilizing AP Stabilizing AP Stabilizing APC Nonstabilizing APC dependability component framework

  13. Approach • Exponential-time synthesis procedure, with adequate polynomial-time heuristic • sufficient for synthesis of byzantine agreement • Dependability component framework enables reuse of application-independent aspects of stabilization • application-dependent parameter used to instantiate this framework, e.g. network type, communication patterns

  14. Sample Component Frameworks • Reactive link-predicate stabilization component • Retransmission based • Use of ACK/NACKs • Proactive link-predicate stabilization component • Forward error correction based • Sending parity packets in advance • Group-of-nodes state-predicate stabilization component

  15. Deliverables and Milestones • Stabilizing Monitoring Framework: • Aug’02: Implementation of basic node monitoring • Aug’03: Implementation of advanced node/group monitoring • Apr’04: Demo of monitoring service use by NEST application • Implementing Stabilizing Applications: • Aug’02: AP-to-APC transformer implementation • Apr’03: Demo of stabilizing transformer-based NEST application • Aug’04: Transformer for stabilization of sequential processes • Stabilizing Synthesis Framework: • Aug’02: Demo of tool for synthesis of stabilizing AP protocols • Apr’03: BNF & semantics of APC dependability component composition language • Aug’03: Application-independent code for reactive & proactive component frameworks • Apr’04: Demo of stabilizing framework-based NEST application

More Related