The original Byzantine Generals problem as stated by Lamport et al.  did not specify that all processes had to decide on a value simultaneously, although the algorithm given in  had that proprety. In , Halpern et al. discuss the possibility of an algorithm in which the processes can decide independently and possibly earlier. This is called Eventual Byzantine Agreement, to differentiate it from Simultaneous Byzantine Agreement.
Their results are based on a technique called continual common knowledge, which is a variant of common knowledge, i.e., the final result of Simultaneous Byzantine Agreement. The key is that at some point in the algorithm, some processor may have enough information to realize that the algorithm will eventually decide on a particular value. In other words, if common knowledge is that ``Everyone knows that everyone knows that ... x,'' then eventual common knowledge is that ``Everyone will know that everyone will know that ... x.'' It turns out that eventual common knowledge is too weak to solve the problem (because of the way Byzantine Agreement is done), so continual common knowledge (what everyone knows at any point in time) is used instead. They give a construction which can translate any Eventual Byzantine Agreement protocol P into an optimal protocol .