I am looking forward to learning about the LIFO repair when you guys decide to talk about it. However, the fact that Raft is goofy and conflates safety, livene

I am looking forward to learning about the LIFO repair when you guys decide to talk about it. However, the fact that Raft is goofy and conflates safety, liveness, and dynamics, doesn't mean that the metastability problem has not been solved in a more traditional FIFO setup. The basic issue is that things like Raft (but most other descriptions in the literature as well) describe replication in terms of RPC: request arrives at the leader, the leader sends three RPCs to followers, waits for two acks, etc. If you actually implement things this way (and many people do) then you end up with the problem that you describe. However, you can organize the system in a different way. A request arrives to the leader and is appended to the leader's proposer log. A separate asynchronous protocol reconciles the proposer log with the follower acceptor logs. This protocol looks like TCP, with some caveats to account for log divergence, so it is pretty well-understood technology. By dimensioning log sizes and timeouts correctly, you can deamortize the whole catchup procedure and bound the latency of every operation as seen from the client (assuming that a quorum of acceptors is available).