ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Tight bounds for clock synchronization
Full text PdfPdf (473 KB)
Source
Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing archive
Proceedings of the 28th ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing table of contents
Calgary, AB, Canada
SESSION: R2 table of contents
Pages 46-55  
Year of Publication: 2009
ISBN:978-1-60558-396-9
Authors
Christoph Lenzen  ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
Thomas Locher  ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
Roger Wattenhofer  ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
Sponsors
SIGOPS: ACM Special Interest Group on Operating Systems
SIGACT: ACM Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 64,   Downloads (12 Months): 92,   Citation Count: 1
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1582716.1582730
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

We present a novel clock synchronization algorithm and prove tight upper and lower bounds on the worst-case clock skew that may occur between any two participants in any given distributed system. More importantly, the worst-case clock skew between neighboring nodes is (asymptotically) at most a factor of two larger than the best possible bound. While previous results solely focused on the dependency of the skew bounds on the network diameter, we prove that our techniques are optimal also with respect to the maximum clock drift, the uncertainty in message delays, and the imposed bounds on the clock rates. The presented results all hold in a general model where both the clock drifts and the message delays may vary arbitrarily within pre-specified bounds.

Furthermore, our algorithm exhibits a number of other highly desirable properties. First, the algorithm ensures that the clock values remain in an affine linear envelope of real time. A better bound on the accuracy with respect to real time cannot be achieved in the absence of an external timer. Second, the algorithm minimizes the number and size of messages that need to be exchanged in a given time period. Moreover, only a small number of bits must be stored locally for each neighbor. Finally, our algorithm can easily be adapted for a variety of other prominent synchronization models.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
 
2
3
4
 
5
6
 
7
B. Korte, D. Rautenbach, and J. Vygen. BonnTools: Mathematical Innovation for Layout and Timing Closure of Systems on a Chip. In Proceedings of the IEEE 95, pages 555--572, 2007.
8
 
9
 
10
C. Lenzen, T. Locher, and R. Wattenhofer. Optimal Clock Synchronization with Bounded Rates. Technical Report 301, ETH Zurich, 2009. ftp.tik.ee.ethz.ch/ pub/publications/TIK-Report-301.pdf.
 
11
C. Lenzen, T. Locher, and R. Wattenhofer. Tight Lower Bounds for Clock Synchronization. Technical Report 299, ETH Zurich, 2009. ftp.tik.ee.ethz.ch/pub/publications/TIK-Report-299.pdf.
 
12
T. Locher. Foundations of Aggregation and Synchronization in Distributed Systems. PhD thesis, ETH Zurich, 2009.
 
13
T. Locher and R. Wattenhofer. Oblivious Gradient Clock Synchronization. In Proc. 20th International Symposium on Distributed Computing (DISC), pages 520--533, 2006.
 
14
J. Lundelius Welch and N. Lynch. An Upper and Lower Bound for Clock Synchronization. Information and Control, 62(2/3):190--204, 1984.
15
16
 
17
D. Mills. Internet Time Synchronization: the Network Time Protocol. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 39:1482--1493, 1991.
18
19
20
21
 
22
P. Sommer and R. Wattenhofer. Gradient Clock Synchronization in Wireless Sensor Networks. In Proc. 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN), San Francisco, USA, April 2009.
23


Collaborative Colleagues:
Christoph Lenzen: colleagues
Thomas Locher: colleagues
Roger Wattenhofer: colleagues