Abstract
Model checking is a well known method to carry out formal verification of distributed systems. This method needs a model representing the behaviour of the system to be verified. The size of this model depends on the complexity of the system. To be able to verify real life systems, it is necessary to use techniques allowing to take advantage of all the available storage space, to reduce the amount of information needed for the verification and to speed up computation time. But the expressiveness of the languages used to describe the system and its expected behaviours (properties) limit the possible reductions. We present in this paper our choices for an automatic verification tool by using model checking. The preliminary results obtained from its use for the verification of a real life protocol allow us to make some estimations about the limits of model checking methods.
This work has been partially supported by the CNET, the French research programme C-cube (CNRS) and by the ESPRIT programme of the Commission of the European Community in the frame of the project Delta 4.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
M. Ben-Ari, Z. Manna, and A. Pnueli. The temporal logic of branching time. Acta informatica, 20, 1983.
E. M. Clarke, E. A. Emerson, and A. P. Sistla. Automatic verification of finite state concurrent systems using temporal logic. In 10th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, 1983.
R. J. Enbody and H. C. Du. Dynamic hashing schemes. ACM Computing Surveys, 20, June 1988.
H. Garavel. Compilation et vérification des programmes Lotos. Thèse, Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble, to be published, 1989.
S. Graf. Logiques du temps arborescent pour la spécification et la preuve de programmes. Thèse de Troisième Cycle, Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, February 1984.
S. Graf and J. Voiron. Using Temporal Logic for Specification and Verification of a Multicast Protocol. Technical Report SPECTRE RTC12, Laboratoire de Génie Informatique — Institut IMAG, Grenoble, January 1989.
G. Holzmann. On limits and possibilities of automated protocol analysis. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification, 1987.
IEEE. IEEE Standards for Local Area Networks: Token Ring Access Method and Physical Layer Specification. International Standard, IEEE, 1985.
ISO. ESTELLE — A Formal Description Technique Based on an Extended State Transition Model. International Standard 9074, International Organization for Standardization — Information Processing Systems — Open Systems Interconnection, Genève, September 1988.
ISO. LOTOS — A Formal Description Technique Based on the Temporal Ordering of Observational Behaviour. International Standard 8807, International Organization for Standardization — Information Processing Systems — Open Systems Interconnection, Genève, September 1988.
R. P. Kurshan. Testing Containment of ω-regular Languages. Technical Report 1121-861010-33-TM, Bell Laboratories, 1986.
L. Lamport. Sometimes is sometimes “not never” — on the temporal logic of programs. In 7th Annual ACM Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 174–185, 1980.
D. Lehmann, A. Pnueli, and J. Stavi. Impartiality, Justice and Fairness: The Ethics of Concurrent Termination, pages 264–277. Volume 115 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, edition, 1981.
R. Milner. A calculus of communicating systems. Volume 92 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, 1980.
S. Owicki and D. Gries. An axiomatic proof technique for parallel programs. Acta informatica, 6:319–340, 1976.
D. Powell, G. Bonn, D. Seaton, P. Verissimo, and F. Waeselyck. The Delta 4 approach to dependability in open distributed computing systems. In Proceedings of FTCS-18, IEE Computer Society Press, June 1988.
J.P. Queille and J. Sifakis. Specification and Verification of concurrent systems in Cesar, pages 337–357. Volume 137 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, April 1982.
J.P. Queille and J. Sifakis. Fairness and related properties in transition systems. Acta Informatica, 19, 1983.
A. Rasse. CLEO, Interprétation de la non-correction de programmes sur un modèle. Technical Report SPECTRE RTC10, Laboratoire de Génie Informatique — Institut IMAG, Grenoble, June 1988.
C. Rodríguez. Spécification et validation de systèmes en Xesar. Thèse de l'Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, May 1988.
J.-L. Richier, C. Rodríguez, J. Sifakis, and J. Voiron. Xesar: A Tool for Protocol Validation. User's Guide. Laboratoire de Génie Informatique — Institut IMAG, Grenoble, September 1987.
J.-L. Richier, C. Rodríguez, J. Sifakis, and J. Voiron. Verification in Xesar of the sliding window protocol. In Harry Rudin and Colin H. West, editors, Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification (Zurich), IFIP/TC6, May 1987.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1990 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Graf, S., Richier, JL., Rodríguez, C., Voiron, J. (1990). What are the limits of model checking methods for the verification of real life protocols?. In: Sifakis, J. (eds) Automatic Verification Methods for Finite State Systems. CAV 1989. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 407. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-52148-8_23
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-52148-8_23
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-52148-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46905-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive