{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0228310502283105, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001141552511415525, 'mean_word_length': 5.448529411764706, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Analysis and comparison of the two multicast error recovery mechanisms

Due to the distribution nature and multi-customer interaction characteristic of the CSCW system, multicast becomes an ideal transmission instrument. Thus we have put into effect a multicast protocol named TORM (totally ordered reliable multicast). In order to evaluate its performance, we conduct the analysis and comparison between TORM and another multicast protocol, SRM (scalable reliable multicast), in respect of their error recovery mechanism. With queuing theory, we establish a queue model, based on which the expression of error recovery latency are worked out. The analytical result demonstrates TORM with the higher error recovery efficiency is often preferable in the CSCW application. Moreover, we simulate the two protocols with NS2, a network simulation tool, and get the same conclusion.