Hot answers tagged


Proof of Work like proposed by Satoshi doesn't solve the Two Generals Problem or the more generic Byzantine Generals Problem. It's a probabilistic solution to the Byzantine Generals Problem, which means the confidence that a consensus is reached is growing with every block added to the chain, but it never reaches 100%.


PoW (or in fact any consensus algorithm) can't solve the Two Generals/Byzantine Generals Problem. It can only provide a very high and easily verifiable certainty of a transaction being correct. A few assumptions are made: Most miners and node operators act either altruistic (true to the code no matter what comes) or economically egoistic (try to make as ...


IBFT Consensus is inspired by Castro-Liskov 99 PBFT paper. Like PBFT, in IBFT a block is confirmed by passing through PREPREPARE, PREPARE and COMMIT phases and like PBFT, the validators moves through series of Rounds. If a block is not commited in a given ROUND, the validators move to the next ROUND and try to commit a block in that ROUND. Both Hyperledger ...


According to an abstract of this paper: The analysis advocates that PoA for permissioned blockchains, deployed over the Internet with Byzantine nodes, do not provide adequate consistency guarantees for scenarios where data integrity is essential. We claim that PBFT can fit better such scenarios, despite a limited loss in terms of performance


Parity supports the Tendermint consensus engine (experimental). You can use it to run a private PBFT-based network, i.e., by adding the following to your chain configuration: "engine": { "tendermint": { "params": { "gasLimitBoundDivisor": "0x400", "validators" : { "list": [ "...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible