Roadmap. The paper is composed of 6 sections. Section 2 describes the anonymous shared memory model and the failure detector class AΩ. An anonymous consensus is presented in Section 3. Its generalization to the case of systems with homonym processes follows (Section 4). Section 5 surveys related work and Section 6 concludes the paper. 2 System model Anonymous shared memory model. We consider a system Π of n ≥ 2 deterministic processes. Processes are anonymous: they do not have identifiers, and they execute identical algorithms. The total number of processes n is however known by the processes. The system is asynchronous, in the sense that each process runs at its own speed, independently of the other processes. Processes communicate with each other by reading and writing atomic shared registers (they are linearizable [26]). Registers are multi-writer and multi-reader: every register can be written in, or read from, by every process. In the pseudo-code we use to describe our algorithm, shared objects are denoted by upper-case letters, while lower-case identifiers are reserved for processes’ local variables. Failures and failure detectors. Processes may crash. A process is correct in an execution if it never crashes in this execution; otherwise it is faulty. We make no assumption on the number of crashes that may occur during a run. As noted in the Introduction, a failure detector is a distributed oracle that provides processes with possibly unreliable information about failures [11]. Several classes of failure detectors suited to anonymous systems have been defined [8]. The failure detector we consider is anonymous Ω, denoted hereafter AΩ. Each process is provided with a primitive AΩ.query(), which returns true or false. The following property, termed eventual leadership is ensured: there exists some correct process p0 such that eventually every AΩ.query() always returns true at p0, and false at every other process.
Roadmap. The background is given in Section 2. The model and the accountable Byzantine consensus problem are pre- sented in Section 3, and impossibility results are given in Section 4. Section 5 describes the Polygraph protocol, which solves the accountable binary Byzantine consensus prob- lem. Section 6 analyses empirically the Polygraph protocol in a geodistributed blockchain. blockchain and Section 7 concludes. An Appendix is left to the discretion of the reader. Xxxxx- xxx A presents the proof of the impossibility result, Xxxxx- xxx B presents the proof of correctness of the Polygraph pro- tocol, Appendix C presents the multivalue Polygraph proto- col that supports arbitrary values. Appendix D presents some optimizations to reduce the complexity of the multivalue Polygraph protocol. Appendix E discusses the applications of the Polygraph protocol to blockchain. Finally, Appendix F shows that a naive extension of classic blockchain consensus protocols, including PBFT, HotStuff and Tendermint, cannot make them accountable.
Roadmap. Within ten (10) business days of the end of each calendar quarter, Company shall provide to Boost Mobile the title, description, target submission and availability dates of the Digital Items Company intends to make available on the Distribution Channels used by Nextel or an Affiliate pursuant to Exhibit D-2 during the upcoming three (3) months.
Roadmap. Lemma 4.3 is proved in a straightforward way (hence omitted), given the random nature of the oracles. The proof of Lemma 4.4 is the main technical bulk of our paper, consisting of the description of an attacker and attack analysis. We first describe the attacker for the case (Initg, Comme, Derived) in Section 4.2, and will then describe an attack against general construc- tions in Appendix C. Lemma 4.4 will follow similarly from the below simpler attack. We may now obtain the following from Lemmas 4.3,4.4, proved via standard black-box separation techniques.
Roadmap. Within ten (10) business days of the end of each calendar quarter, Company shall provide to Nextel the title, description, target submission and availability dates of the Digital Items Company intends to make available on the Distribution Channels used by Nextel or an Affiliate pursuant to Exhibit D-1 during the upcoming three (3) months.
Roadmap. The focus for this scope will be to assist the Joint Leadership Committee (JLC) execute the GLCAP developed during Phases I and II. The JLC is comprised of staff from the City of Lafayette, the City of West Lafayette, and Tippecanoe County who were appointed by their respective Mayors and Commissioners. The JLC is supported by the following committees: Executive Committee - comprised of the Mayors and Commissioners who provide final approval of plan and initiatives; Steering Committee – comprised of local business / industry leaders and community stakeholders who form ad hoc work groups to assist in the execution of discrete portions of the GLCAP; and the Advisory Committee - comprised of climate action experts and local community groups who provide the JLC input related to technical matters. It is anticipated that all meetings will be virtual and that deliverables will be provided in electronic format.
Roadmap. Following this firm commitment to further expand and deepen their cooperation in the defence field both sides agree on a roadmap of energetic steps to achieve tangible results. This roadmap, attached as an annex to this declaration, will be regarded as a living, non-limitative document, serving to evaluate the status and progress of the German-Netherlands cooperation in the field of defence at ministerial level. Signed in duplicate at on . Xx. Xxxxxx xx Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx-Xxxxxxxxxxx Federal Minister of Defence Minister of Defence of the Federal Republic of Germany of the Kingdom of the Netherlands Annex: Roadmap for the Further Enhancement of the Bilateral Relations in the Field of Defence Goals:
Roadmap. The parties will cooperate to develop a product roadmap and associated schedule that reflects the direction and future evolution of Products. The roadmap may include plans for major releases of, or other modifications to, Products, such as different industrial designs, cost reductions, and other new features as to which the parties may mutually agree.
Roadmap. Supplier, through appropriately senior Supplier personnel, will provide JPMC with regular updates, no less often than quarterly, regarding anticipated and potential changes to the Supplier TMS and Supplier OPS for the then-next [***] to [***] month period, including reasonable details on all new or changed features, templates and technical specifications when available, to ensure that JPMC is aware of all changes to the Supplier TMS and Supplier OPS and that the Parties have an opportunity to discuss which changes may constitute Material Modifications to the Supplier TMS and Supplier OPS. Further, Supplier will provide written notice to JPMC of any anticipated or potential Material Modifications as early as possible and, in any event, at least [***] days prior to implementation thereof. For purposes of this Schedule a “Material Modification” shall mean any change planned or implemented by Supplier to the System, including Supplier TMS and Supplier OPS or its associated systems or processes, such as those that (i) materially affects the manner in which either JPMC or Customers use or interface (at either a systems or user level) with the System, including the Supplier TMS and Supplier OPS; or (ii) may have a material impact on the use, disclosure or security of any JPMC Data, including the Daily Feed. If JPMC has reasonable concerns with continuing to operate under this Schedule due to the impact of any such anticipated or potential Material Modification(s), the Parties agree to use good faith efforts to resolve such issue in accordance with Section 18 (Dispute Resolution) of the Agreement. If the Parties cannot come to a resolution, JPMC may terminate this Schedule and the Agreement without penalty upon [***] days’ written notice.
Roadmap. The Licensed Software to provide functionality so consumer does not have to re-enter credit card information if they've shopped at the store before. For June delivery. The Licensed Software can either store the credit card numbers with the customer account information on the same Pandesic server or Pandesic can utilize the Cybercash database to retrieve previously used credit cards. Pandesic will also work with Merchant to define longer term solution requirements for inclusion into 2.1 release.
