• Computer Science > Networking and Internet Architecture [Submitted on 3 Oct 2025 (v1), last revised 20 Feb 2026 (this version, v2)] Title:DH-EAC: Design of a Dynamic, Hierarchical Entanglement Access Control Protocol View PDF HTML (experimental)Abstract:We propose Dynamic, Hierarchical Entanglement Access Control (DH-EAC), a pure-quantum protocol for fair and anonymous allocation of scarce entanglement across wide-area quantum networks composed of many quantum LANs (QLANs). • Prior Dicke-state-based pure-quantum MACs resolve contention by local measurements without classical signaling, but they mainly target a single QLAN under static conditions; extending them to wide-area, dynamic settings while avoiding post-selection reconciliation remains open. • DH-EAC adopts a two-layer pure-quantum lottery: the outer layer selects winning QLANs and the inner layer selects winning nodes within each winning QLAN. • A key design principle is that both the winning set and the per-QLAN quota are fixed by measurements alone, so the contention loop requires no classical round trip. • The protocol thus aims to jointly satisfy anonymity (no node IDs revealed until decisions are fixed) and fairness (bias suppression under heterogeneous QLAN sizes). • We also provide analytical models for success probability and latency under a standard i.i.d.
Article Summaries:
- Researchers have introduced DH‑EAC, a pure‑quantum protocol that dynamically allocates scarce entanglement across wide‑area quantum networks composed of many quantum LANs (QLANs). The design uses a two‑layer lottery: an outer layer selects winning QLANs, and an inner layer chooses winning nodes within each selected QLAN. Both the winning set and per‑QLAN quota are determined solely by quantum measurements, eliminating the need for classical round‑trip signaling. DH‑EAC aims to preserve anonymity (node identities remain hidden until decisions are fixed) and fairness (bias suppression across heterogeneous QLAN sizes). Analytical models and simulations show improved success probability, lower latency, and higher fairness compared to single‑layer Dicke‑state MACs and classical allocation schemes.
Sources: