Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > On choosing server-or client-side solutions for...

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

On choosing server-or client-side solutions for BFT

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

On choosing server-or client-side solutions for BFT. / Platania, M.; Obenshain, D.; Tantillo, T.; Amir, Y.; Suri, Neeraj.

In: ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 48, No. 4, 61, 01.05.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Platania, M, Obenshain, D, Tantillo, T, Amir, Y & Suri, N 2016, 'On choosing server-or client-side solutions for BFT', ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 48, no. 4, 61. https://doi.org/10.1145/2886780

APA

Platania, M., Obenshain, D., Tantillo, T., Amir, Y., & Suri, N. (2016). On choosing server-or client-side solutions for BFT. ACM Computing Surveys, 48(4), [61]. https://doi.org/10.1145/2886780

Vancouver

Platania M, Obenshain D, Tantillo T, Amir Y, Suri N. On choosing server-or client-side solutions for BFT. ACM Computing Surveys. 2016 May 1;48(4). 61. https://doi.org/10.1145/2886780

Author

Platania, M. ; Obenshain, D. ; Tantillo, T. ; Amir, Y. ; Suri, Neeraj. / On choosing server-or client-side solutions for BFT. In: ACM Computing Surveys. 2016 ; Vol. 48, No. 4.

Bibtex

@article{7d917b61847b4758966eda92f432c2e7,
title = "On choosing server-or client-side solutions for BFT",
abstract = "Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT) protocols have the ability to work correctly even when up to a threshold f of system servers are compromised. This makes them appealing for the construction of critical systems connected to the Internet, which are constantly a target for cyber attacks. BFT protocols differ based on the kind of application, deployment settings, performance, access control mechanisms, number of servers in the system, and protocol implementation. The large number of protocols present in the literature and their differences make it difficult for a system builder to choose the solution that best satisfies the requirements of the system that he wants to build. In particular, the main difference among BFT protocols lies in their system models: server-side versus client-side. In the server-side model each client relies on the system to consistently order and replicate updates, while in the client-side model each client actively participates in the protocol. In this article, we classify BFT protocols as server-side or client-side. We analyze the trade-offs between the two models, describe systems that use thesemodels and the trade-offs they choose, highlight the research gaps, and provide guidelines to system builders in order to choose the solution that best satisfies their needs.",
keywords = "BFT quorums, BFT state machine replication, Deployment strategies, Performance, Trade-offs, Access control, Commerce, Deployment strategy, State machine replication, Trade off, Economic and social effects",
author = "M. Platania and D. Obenshain and T. Tantillo and Y. Amir and Neeraj Suri",
year = "2016",
month = may,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1145/2886780",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
journal = "ACM Computing Surveys",
issn = "0360-0300",
publisher = "Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - On choosing server-or client-side solutions for BFT

AU - Platania, M.

AU - Obenshain, D.

AU - Tantillo, T.

AU - Amir, Y.

AU - Suri, Neeraj

PY - 2016/5/1

Y1 - 2016/5/1

N2 - Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT) protocols have the ability to work correctly even when up to a threshold f of system servers are compromised. This makes them appealing for the construction of critical systems connected to the Internet, which are constantly a target for cyber attacks. BFT protocols differ based on the kind of application, deployment settings, performance, access control mechanisms, number of servers in the system, and protocol implementation. The large number of protocols present in the literature and their differences make it difficult for a system builder to choose the solution that best satisfies the requirements of the system that he wants to build. In particular, the main difference among BFT protocols lies in their system models: server-side versus client-side. In the server-side model each client relies on the system to consistently order and replicate updates, while in the client-side model each client actively participates in the protocol. In this article, we classify BFT protocols as server-side or client-side. We analyze the trade-offs between the two models, describe systems that use thesemodels and the trade-offs they choose, highlight the research gaps, and provide guidelines to system builders in order to choose the solution that best satisfies their needs.

AB - Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT) protocols have the ability to work correctly even when up to a threshold f of system servers are compromised. This makes them appealing for the construction of critical systems connected to the Internet, which are constantly a target for cyber attacks. BFT protocols differ based on the kind of application, deployment settings, performance, access control mechanisms, number of servers in the system, and protocol implementation. The large number of protocols present in the literature and their differences make it difficult for a system builder to choose the solution that best satisfies the requirements of the system that he wants to build. In particular, the main difference among BFT protocols lies in their system models: server-side versus client-side. In the server-side model each client relies on the system to consistently order and replicate updates, while in the client-side model each client actively participates in the protocol. In this article, we classify BFT protocols as server-side or client-side. We analyze the trade-offs between the two models, describe systems that use thesemodels and the trade-offs they choose, highlight the research gaps, and provide guidelines to system builders in order to choose the solution that best satisfies their needs.

KW - BFT quorums

KW - BFT state machine replication

KW - Deployment strategies

KW - Performance

KW - Trade-offs

KW - Access control

KW - Commerce

KW - Deployment strategy

KW - State machine replication

KW - Trade off

KW - Economic and social effects

U2 - 10.1145/2886780

DO - 10.1145/2886780

M3 - Journal article

VL - 48

JO - ACM Computing Surveys

JF - ACM Computing Surveys

SN - 0360-0300

IS - 4

M1 - 61

ER -