00:28:05 Marc-Antoine Parent: raft has timers, so not asynchronous 00:30:50 Michael Mure: for CRDTs, isn't that that there is causality in messages, which bounds the time and avoid the full asynchronous problem? 00:31:39 Uchenna Nwanyanwu: Sorry about that, I didn't know that the mic was enabled 00:31:45 Brooklyn Zelenka (@expede): No prob! 00:35:00 Marc-Antoine Parent: I'd say it's a different form of consensus 00:35:17 Marc-Antoine Parent: consensus without awareness of consensus... 00:38:02 Brian: https://www.podc.org/influential/2001-influential-paper/ 00:38:54 Eleanor: thank you for the link! 00:39:17 Jagan: What is the relation between TCP and consensus? 00:40:30 Kim: There are cases where both sides agree that delivery happened, at least. 00:41:08 Mauve: (sorry was there supposed to be a IPVM community call in here in 7 mins?) 00:41:29 Steve Moyer: seq is also useful in TCP if you happen to get a packet twice 00:41:35 Brooklyn Zelenka (@expede): @mauve tomorrow! 00:41:50 James Walker (@walkah): I think tomorrow is WNFS? IPVM in my calendar isn't until the 20th 00:42:20 Mauve: I think my calendar is messed up. Apologies for the intrusion. 😁 00:42:34 Sodium : \o 00:42:35 James Walker (@walkah): You're more than welcome to stick around :) 00:55:16 Marc-Antoine Parent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Time_Protocol#Clock_synchronization_algorithm 00:55:52 Marc-Antoine Parent: there is a feedback loop 00:59:54 Sodium : "What’s the Difference? Efficient Set Reconciliation without Prior Context" https://www.ics.uci.edu/~eppstein/pubs/EppGooUye-SIGCOMM-11.pdf 01:00:00 Eleanor: very interested in next months paper 01:04:49 Jon Forsyth: Does Byzantine have a formal definition in Distributed Systems? 01:04:55 Marc-Antoine Parent: If so also look at https://github.com/Libero0809/PBS.git 01:05:07 Marc-Antoine Parent: (@Eleanor) 01:05:28 Eleanor: thanks 01:05:50 Sodium : Lamport's "The Byzantine Generals Problem": https://lamport.azurewebsites.net/pubs/byz.pdf 01:06:15 Jon Forsyth: thx 01:06:18 Marc-Antoine Parent: (I think we should look at this one too personally!) 01:07:19 Marc-Antoine Parent: rho? do you mean sigma? 01:10:18 Nithin Thomas: the last section briefly discussed consensus when the number of dead processes are known. it sounds really similar to RAFT. I am curious about that in the sense if asynchronous communication can be used to setup something like RAFT? 01:11:34 Marc-Antoine Parent: Nithin: interesting question! But... would you not say that raft uses timers to add synchronicity to an asynchronous basis? 01:14:26 Nithin Thomas: yeah that makes sense, thank you 01:15:22 Daniel Holmgren: have another meeting coming up so gotta run. thanks yall! 01:15:25 Marc-Antoine Parent: Shannon's theory of communication 01:15:31 Brooklyn Zelenka (@expede): Thanks Daniel! 01:16:11 Steve Moyer: was thinking of Shannon while we were discussing NTP 01:17:36 Sodium : yes, the messages are addressed to individual processes 01:18:20 Sodium : "Processes communicate by sending each other messages. A message is a pair (p, m), where p is the name of the destination process and m is a “message value” from a fixed universe M. "