Consensus Ordering of Broadcast Messages in Multicast Networks
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current multi-party network protocols face challenges in efficiently identifying and isolating malicious nodes, leading to increased computational overhead and delays, especially when no nodes are malicious, and existing solutions are either too complex or not well-suited for systems with a large number of multicast groups.
Innovation Solution
A system and method for consensus ordering of broadcast messages among nodes in a network, where nodes agree on the order of events, request votes, and designate malicious nodes based on disputes, ensuring consistent message ordering and isolating malicious nodes without introducing significant delays or computational overhead.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If a hierarchy of nodes is used to obtain global total ordering in subgroups, then total order is achieved, but communication overhead and delays increase significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments the network into multiple multicast groups, each with its own local ordering rules. Instead of requiring a single global hierarchy to order all messages across all groups, each group independently establishes local order through simple rules based on message source and destination groups. This segmentation eliminates the need for complex global coordination while maintaining reliable ordering within each segment.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces an intermediary mechanism where the relationship between source group and destination group acts as a mediator to determine message order. Messages are ordered based on their group relationships rather than requiring direct comparison between all nodes. This intermediary approach simplifies the ordering logic from O(n²) complexity to a more manageable scheme based on group hierarchies.
2Measurement precision
If complex serialization mechanisms are used to identify malicious nodes, then identification accuracy improves, but protocol complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system employs self-service mechanisms where nodes automatically detect and isolate malicious participants through simple voting rules. When a node deviates from the protocol, other nodes independently identify the deviation and collectively exclude the malicious node without requiring complex centralized arbitration. Each node serves itself by monitoring others and reporting deviations, eliminating the need for sophisticated identification protocols.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements feedback mechanisms where nodes continuously monitor message ordering and report discrepancies. When ordering violations occur, the system provides feedback to identify the malicious node through simple voting rules. This feedback loop enables accurate identification of malicious participants while maintaining protocol simplicity, as nodes only need to compare local ordering with expected ordering based on group hierarchy rules.
3Reliability
If dispute resolution protocols are implemented to handle malicious behavior, then system security improves, but computational overhead increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system applies partial action by implementing dispute resolution only when necessary, rather than continuously validating all messages. Nodes use simple voting rules that require minimal computation under normal conditions. When malicious behavior is detected, the system activates dispute resolution protocols selectively, performing excessive validation only for suspicious messages while maintaining efficient operation for legitimate traffic.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent employs lightweight, disposable voting tokens and temporary dispute markers that require minimal computational resources. Instead of maintaining complex state information about all possible disputes, nodes use simple, ephemeral objects to represent voting intentions and dispute status. These cheap, short-living objects enable secure dispute resolution with minimal computational overhead, as they can be created and discarded easily without requiring expensive verification.
Data Source
AI summary
The system is directed to a plurality of nodes in a network and a process by which the nodes reach a consensus ordering of broadcast messages. For example, one or more nodes proceed by agreeing on an order of two or more broadcast message derived events A and B. If a node sees event A longer than a time period (T6) before seeing event B, then the node outputs “A consensus-before B” as a consensus broadcast ordering. If the node sees the event A and not the event B after waiting at least T6, then the node outputs “A consensus-before B” as a consensus broadcast ordering. However, if the node sees both events A and event B within T6, then the node broadcasts a request for a vote on message ordering, executes a consensus broadcast reception protocol for the votes, and makes an ordering decision based on the votes received.