Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31D88200C3B for ; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 17:28:47 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 3047A160B7F; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:28:47 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 786E3160B7A for ; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 17:28:46 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 10384 invoked by uid 500); 18 Mar 2017 16:28:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@reef.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@reef.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@reef.apache.org Received: (qmail 10370 invoked by uid 99); 18 Mar 2017 16:28:44 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:28:44 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 63E261A0219 for ; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:28:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.652 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.652 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.652, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZU_-810glsE0 for ; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:28:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org [209.188.14.139]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTP id EB8705FB6A for ; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:28:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (unknown [207.244.88.139]) by mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id CC77BE05EE for ; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:28:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jira-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at jira-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id 89F5E254B7 for ; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:28:41 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:28:41 +0000 (UTC) From: "Gyewon Lee (JIRA)" To: dev@reef.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (REEF-1745) Formal analysis on REEF protocols MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:28:47 -0000 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/REEF-1745?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15931266#comment-15931266 ] Gyewon Lee commented on REEF-1745: ---------------------------------- To students who are interested in this issue as a possible GSoC 2017 topic, I think only verifying protocols' correctness is not enough to be a good GSoC topic, because the verification itself cannot contribute to the REEF code base. When writing a GSoC proposal on this issue, you should have a concrete plan on how to improve current protocol designs based on the formal analysis. It would be also good to have one more proposal on another issue, in case that you fail to find any bugs on REEF protocols thus cannot contribute to REEF code base. > Formal analysis on REEF protocols > --------------------------------- > > Key: REEF-1745 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/REEF-1745 > Project: REEF > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: Gyewon Lee > Labels: gsoc2017 > > In REEF, there are some protocols which are used for communication between different components(ex. Driver <-> Evaluator, C# <-> Java), but we don't have any formal specifications on them. This topic has been discussed in reef developer mailing list. > Writing formal specifications on these protocols will help us find bugs and verify the correctness of the protocols. TLA+(http://lamport.azurewebsites.net/tla/tla.html) and Alloy(http://alloy.mit.edu/alloy/) are suggested as possible tools. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)