data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/754bb/754bb649ec1cbf065b6ed868417a915b3e378c35" alt=""
effective names (and localities) of services into the source code and to dynami-
cally bind services during the execution only on demand, making transparent the
distribution of services and allowing to repicate or to re-allocate a service into a
new locality without requiring any change into service orchestration programs.
3 Lessons Learned
We started our experiment with the goal of understanding whether the WEB
service metaphor could be effectively exploited to develop semantic-based verifi-
cation environments. In this respect, the prototype implementation of a toolkit
supporting verification of mobile processes specified in the π-calculus is a signi-
ficative example.
Our approach adopts a service orchestration model whose main advantage
resides in reducing the impact of network dependencies and of dynamic ad-
dition/removal of WEB services by the well-identified notions of directory of
services and trader. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first verification
toolkit that specifically addresses the problem of exploiting WEB services.
The service orchestration mechanisms presented in this paper, however, have
some disadvantages. In particular, they do not exploit the full expressive power
of SOAP to handle types and signatures. For instance, the so called “version
consistency” problem (namely the client program can work with one version of
the service and not with others) can be solved by types and signatures.
We plan to investigate and experiment the .NET framework to design “next
generation” semantic-based verification environments.
References
1. G. Ferrari, G. Ferro, S. Gnesi, U. Montanari, M. Pistore, and G. Ristori. An au-
tomata based verification environment for mobile processes. In E. Brinksma, editor,
TACAS’97, LNCS 1217. Springer, Apr. 1997.
2. G. Ferrari, S. Gnesi, U. Montanari, M. Pistore, and G. Ristori. Verifying mobile
processes in the HAL environment. In Proc. 10th International Computer Aided
Verification Conference, pages 511–515, 1998.
3. G. Ferrari, U. Montanari, and M. Pistore. Minimizing transition systems for name
passing calculi: A co-algebraic formulation. In M. Nielsen and U. Engberg, editors,
FOSSACS 2002, volume LNCS 2303, pages 129–143. Springer Verlag, 2002.
4. IBM Software Group. Web services conceptual architecture. In IBM White Papers,
2000.
5. U. Montanari and M. Pistore. π-calculus, structured coalgebras and minimal hd-
automata. In Proc. MFCS’2000, volume 1893 of LNCS. Springer, 2000.
6. F. Orava and J. Parrow. An algebraic verification of a mobile network. Formal
Aspects of Computing, 4(1):497–543, 1992.
7. M. Pistore. History dependent automata. PhD thesis, Computer Science Depart-
ment, Universit`a di Pisa, 1999.
8. E. Tuosto. Non-Functional Aspects of Wide Area Network Programming. PhD
thesis, Dipartimento di Informatica, Universit`a di Pisa, 2002.
74