
AllConcur: Leaderless Concurrent Atomic Broadcast - steeve
http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.05866
======
cioc
Paper's network assumptions:

"We assume a model of reliable communication—messages cannot be lost (only
delayed). This is a reasonable assumption if we consider a reliable protocol,
such as TCP."

Paxos network assumptions:

"Messages can take arbitrarily long to be delivered, can be duplicated, and
can be lost, but they are not corrupted." \-
[http://research.microsoft.com/en-
us/um/people/lamport/pubs/p...](http://research.microsoft.com/en-
us/um/people/lamport/pubs/paxos-simple.pdf)

~~~
mperham
Sounds like Paxos could be implemented on top of UDP whereas AllConcur
requires TCP?

~~~
cioc
Duplicated and lost messages will happen in practice - TCP attempts to build
reliable communication on an unreliable medium. Not clear from the paper if
this matters.

I think the larger misunderstanding of the paper is the requirement that paxos
have a leader - lamport's synod algorithm does not require a leader, the
leader is an optimization!

~~~
grogers
Without a long-lived leader, the performance would be so bad that I doubt
there is a single production implementation that doesn't use that
optimization.

------
csears
How does this differ from RAFT?

