Determining Server Locations in Server Migration Service to Minimize Monetary Penalty of Dynamic Server Migration

  • Yukinobu Fukushima
  • Tutomu Murase
  • Gen Motoyoshi
  • Tokumi Yokohira
  • Tatsuya Suda


In this paper, we propose a new class of service called server migration service (SMS) to augment the existing IaaS (Infrastructure as a Service). SMS allows servers (server-side processes of a network application) to dynamically and automatically migrate as their clients (client-side processes of a network application) change their locations in order to reduce the total monetary penalty that the SMS provider pays to its SMS subscribers when failing to provide them with the guaranteed level of QoS. In this paper, we consider the monetary impact that arises from QoS degradation due to server migration and build an integer programming model to determine when and to which location servers should migrate to minimize the total monetary penalty incurred by the SMS provider. Numerical examples show that SMS achieves up to 96% lower total monetary penalty compared to that without server migration. Numerical examples also show that the integer programming model developed in this paper requires reasonable computation time under realistic parameter settings.


Cloud service IaaS Server migration service (SMS) Dynamic and automatic migration Server locations Monetary penalty Service pricing policy Integer programming model 



This research and development work was supported by the MIC/SCOPE #162108003.


  1. 1.
    Amazon EC2: Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  2. 2.
    Google Computer Engine: Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  3. 3.
    Microsoft Azure: Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  4. 4.
    Armbrust, M., Fox, A., Griffith, R., Joseph, D.A., Katz, R., Konwinski, A., Lee, G., Patterson, D., Rabkin, A., Stoica, I., Zaharia, M.: A view of cloud computing. Commun. ACM 53, 50–58 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mell, P., Grance, T.: The NIST definition of cloud computing. Accessed 25 Oct 2016
  6. 6.
    Lecture2: Kinds of delays, Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  7. 7.
    How much network latency is “typical” for east–west coast USA?. Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  8. 8.
    Clincy, V., Wilgor, B.: Subjective evaluation of latency and packet loss in a cloud-based game. In: 10th International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations, pp. 473–476 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen, K., Xu, K., Xi, K., Chao, J.H.: Intelligent virtual machine placement for cost efficiency in geo-distributed cloud systems. In: IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), pp. 3498–3503 (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anan, M., Nasser, N.: SLA-based optimization of energy efficiency for green cloud computing. In: IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), pp. 1–6 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Anan, M., Nasser, N., Ahmed, A., Alfuqaha, A.: Optimization of power and migration cost in virtualized data centers. In: IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), pp. 1–5 (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harrison, G.C., Chess, M.D., Kershenbaum, A.: Mobile agents: Are they a good idea? Technical report. IBM Research Division (1995)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lange, B.D., Oshima, M.: Seven good reasons for mobile agents. Commun. ACM 42(3), 88–89 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hara, T., Tsukamoto, M., Nishio, S.: A scheduling method of database migration for WAN environments. In: Brazilian Symposium on Database (SBBD), pp. 125–136 (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ranjan, S., Rolia, J., Fu, H., Knightly, E.: QoS-driven server migration for Internet data centers. In: Tenth International Workshop on Quality of Service (IWQoS), pp. 3–12 (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ichihara, H., Koizumi, Y., Ohsaki, H., Hato, K., Murayama, J., Imase, M.: On the integrated control of virtual machine live migration and traffic engineering for cloud computing. In: IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), pp. 1629–1634 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Alicherry, M., Lakshman, V. T.: Network aware resource allocation in distributed clouds. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM), pp. 963–971 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    AWS global infrastructure: Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  19. 19.
    Bonomi, F., Milito, R., Zhu, J., Addepalli, S.: Fog computing and its role in the internet of things. In: Proceedings of the MCC Workshop on Mobile Cloud Computing, pp. 13–16 (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mahmud, R., Buyya, R.: Fog Computing: A Taxonomy, Survey and Future Directions. arXiv preprint arXiv: 1611, 05539 (2016)
  21. 21.
    Quadrio, G., Bujari, A., Palazzi, E.C., Ronzani, D., Maggiorini, D., Ripamonti, A.L.: Network analysis of the steam in-home streaming game system. In: The 22nd Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom), pp. 475–476 (2016)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lee, S.C.: The revolution of StarCraft network traffic. In: The 11th Annual Workshop on Network and System Support for Games (NetGames), Article No. 18 (2012)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nathan, S., Kulkarni, P., Bellur, U.: Resource availability based performance benchmarking of virtual machine migrations. In: The 4th ACM/SPEC International Conference on Performance Engineering (ICPE), pp. 387–398 (2013)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
  25. 25.
    Amazon EC2 service level agreement: Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  26. 26.
    Google Compute Engine Service Level Agreement: Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  27. 27.
    Lee, E.K., Gallagher, R.J., Silvern, D., Wuu, C.S., Zaider, M.: Treatment planning for brachytherapy: an integer programming model, two computational approaches and experiments with permanent prostate implant planning. Phys. Med. Biol. 44(1), 145 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Meng, X., Pappas, V., Zhang, L.: Improving the scalability of data center networks with traffic-aware virtual machine placement. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM) (2010)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ramaswami, R., Sivarajan, N.K.: Design of logical topologies for wavelength-routed optical networks. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 14(5), 840–851 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Japan Photonic Network Model: Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  31. 31.
    Xue, L., Cui, C., Kumar, S.: Experimental evaluation of the effect of queue management schemes on the performance of high speed TCPs in 10Gbps network environment. In: International Conference on Computing, Networking, and Communications (ICNC), pp. 315–319 (2012)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vishwanath, A, Zhu, J, Hinton, K, Ayre, R, Tucker, R.: Estimating the energy consumption for packet processing, storage and switching in optical-IP routers. In: Optical Fiber Communication Conference (OFC), paper OM3A.6 (2013)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Enachescu, M., Ganjali, Y., Goel, A., McKeown, N., Roughgarden, T.: Part III: Routers with very small buffers. SIGCOMM Comp Comm rev 35, 83–90 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
  35. 35.
    Woeginger, G.J.: Exact Algorithms for NP-hard Problems: A Survey. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2570, 185–207 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Arora, S.: Approximation Schemes for NP-hard Geometric Optimization Problems: A Survey. Mathematical Programming 97, 43–69 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    What is Docker: Accessed 8 Aug 2017

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yukinobu Fukushima
    • 1
  • Tutomu Murase
    • 2
  • Gen Motoyoshi
    • 3
  • Tokumi Yokohira
    • 1
  • Tatsuya Suda
    • 4
  1. 1.The Graduate School of Natural Science and TechnologyOkayama UniversityOkayama-cityJapan
  2. 2.Information Technology CenterNagoya UniversityFuro-cho, Chikusa-kuJapan
  3. 3.NEC Corporation of AmericaHerzliyaIsrael
  4. 4.University Netgroup Inc.FallbrookUSA

Personalised recommendations