Antoine Pichot, Oliver Wäldrich, Wolfgang Ziegler, Philipp Wieder


In Grid, e-Science and e-Business environments Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are often used to establish frameworks for the delivery of services between service providers and the home organisations of the customers. While this high level SLAs, e.g. framework contracts, govern the relationship between the parties, it is desirable for the end-user to have dedicated quality of service (QoS) also for individual services like the orchestration of resources necessary for composed services. Grid level scheduling services typically are responsible for the orchestration and coordination of resources in the Grid, which requires the Grid level scheduler to coordinate resource management systems probably located in different domains. As the site autonomy has to be respected negotiating with the individual sites is the only way to achieve the intended coordination. Electronic SLAs emerged as a new way to negotiate and manage usage of resources in the Grid and are already adopted by a number of management systems. Therefore, it is natural to look for ways to adopt SLAs for Grid level scheduling. To realise this approach we need efficient and flexible protocols supporting dynamic negotiation and creation of SLAs. In this paper we propose and discuss ongoing work on extensions to the WS-Agreement protocol addressing these issues.


  1. Andrieux, A. et al. (2007). Web Services Agreement Specification (WS-Agreement). Grid Forum Document GFD.107, Open Grid Forum.
  2. Badia, R., Sirvent, R., Labarta, J., and Perez, J. M. (2006). Programming the GRID: An Imperative Languagebased Approach. In Di Martino, B., Dongarra, J., Hoisie, A., Yang, L. T., and Zima, H., editors, Engineering The Grid: Status and Perspective, chapter 12. American Scientific Publishers.
  3. Bhargava, B. (1987). Concurrency and Reliability in Distributed Database Systems. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
  4. Briquet, C. and de Marneffe, P.-A. (2006). Grid resource negotiation: survey with a machine learning perspective. In PDCN'06: Proceedings of the 24th IASTED international conference on Parallel and distributed computing and networks, pages 17-22, Anaheim, CA, USA. ACTA Press.
  5. Buyya, R. (2002). Economic-based Distributed Resource Management and Scheduling for Grid Computing, PhD Thesis. Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
  6. Czajkowski, K., Foster, I., Kesselman, C., Sander, V., and Tuecke, S. (2002). SNAP : A protocol for negotiation of service level agreements and coordinated resource management in distributed systems. In Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Job Scheduling Strategies for Parallel Processing, pages 153-183, Edinburgh, Scotland.
  7. Green, L. (2004). Service level negotiation in a heterogeneous telecommunication environment. In Proceeding International Conference on Computing, Communications and Control Technologies (CCCT04), Austin, TX, USA.
  8. Jennings, N., Faratin, P., Lomuscio, A., Parsons, S., Sierra, C., and Wooldridge, M. (2001). Automated negotiation: Prospects, methods and challenges. Group Decision and Negotiation, 10(2):199-215.
  9. Joita, L. and Rana, O. (2006). WS-Agreement Use in CATNETS. Technical report, School of Computer Science and Welsh eScience Centre, Cardiff, UK.
  10. Keller, A. (2007). openCCS: Computing Center Software. Technical report, Paderborn Center for Parallel Computing, Paderborn, Germany.
  11. Kohler, W. (1981). A Survey of Techniques for Synchronization and Recovery in Decentralized Computer Systems. ACM Computing Surveys, 13(2):148-183.
  12. Kuo, D., Parkin, M., and Brooke, J. (2006a). A Framework & Negotiation Protocol for Service Contracts. In Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing (SCC 2006), pages 253-256.
  13. Kuo, D., Parkin, M., and Brooke, J. (2006b). Negotiating contracts on the grid. In Exploiting the Knowledge Economy - Issues, Applications, Case Studies, Volume 3, Proceedings of the eChallenges 2006 (e-2006) Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. IOS Press.
  14. MacLaren, J. (2007). Co-allocation of Compute and Network resources using HARC. In Proceedings of ”Lighting the Blue Touchpaper for UK eScience: closing conference of ESLEA Project” (PoS(ESLEA)016).
  15. Mobach, D., Overeinder, B., and Brazier, F. (2006). A WSAgreement Based Resource Negotiation Framework for Mobile Agents. Scalable Computing: Practice and Experience, 7 (1):23 - 36.
  16. Oszu, M. and Valduriez, P. (1991). Principles of Distributed Database Systems. Prentice Hall.
  17. Shakun, M., editor (2002). Group Decision and Negotiation. Springer Netherlands.
  18. Shen, W., Ghenniwa, H. H., and Wang, C. (2002). Adaptive Negotiation for Agent-Based Grid Computing. In Proceedings of AAMAS2002 workshop on agentcities: Challenges in Open Agent Environments, pages 32- 36, Bologna, Italy.
  19. Skeen, D. (1981). Nonblocking Commit Protocols. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD Int'l Conf. Management of Data, pages 133-142.
  20. Wieder, P., Wäldrich, O., and Ziegler, W. (2005). A metascheduling service for co-allocating arbitrary types of resources. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference, Parallel Processing and Applied Mathematics, PPAM 2005, volume 3911 of LNCS, pages 782 - 791, Poznan, Poland. Springer.

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Pichot A., Wäldrich O., Ziegler W. and Wieder P. (2008). DYNAMIC SLA NEGOTIATION BASED ON WS-AGREEMENT . In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1: WEBIST, ISBN 978-989-8111-26-5, pages 38-45. DOI: 10.5220/0001525500380045

in Bibtex Style

author={Antoine Pichot and Oliver Wäldrich and Wolfgang Ziegler and Philipp Wieder},
booktitle={Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1: WEBIST,},

in EndNote Style

JO - Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1: WEBIST,
SN - 978-989-8111-26-5
AU - Pichot A.
AU - Wäldrich O.
AU - Ziegler W.
AU - Wieder P.
PY - 2008
SP - 38
EP - 45
DO - 10.5220/0001525500380045