Efficient and Transparent Web-Services Selection

  • Nicolas Gibelin
  • Mesaac Makpangou
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3826)


Web services technology standards enable description, publication, discovery of and binding to services distributed towards the Internet. However, current standards do not address the service selection issue : how did a consumer select the service that matches its functional (e.g. operations’ semantics) and non-functional (e.g. price, reputation, response time) properties ? Most projects advocate automatic selection mechanism, advising adaptation or modification of the web-services model and its entities (UDDI, WSDL, Client, Provider). These proposals also do not take advantage of distributed-systems’ state of the art, mainly with respect to the collection and the dissemination of services’ QoS. This paper presents an extension of the initial model that permits automatic service selection, late binding and collection of metrics that characterize the quality of service. The extension consists on a web-service access infrastructure, made of web service proxies and a peer to peer network of QoS metrics repository (the proposal does not impose modification on UDDI registries or services). The proxies interact with common UDDI registries to find suitable services for selection and to publish descriptions. They collect QoS metrics and store them on a p2p network.


Service Selection Mean Time Between Failure UDDI Registry Local Proxy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Clark, M.: Uddi - the weather report (2001),
  2. 2.
    Liu, Y., Ngu, A.H., Zeng, L.Z.: Qos computation and policing in dynamic web service selection. In: WWW Alt. 2004: Proceedings of the 13th international World Wide Web conference on Alternate track papers & posters, pp. 66–73. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ran, S.: A model for web services discovery with qos. SIGecom Exch. 4, 1–10 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Day, J., Deters, R.: Selecting the best web service. In: CASCON 2004: Proceedings of the 2004 conference of the Centre for Advanced Studies on Collaborative research, pp. 293–307. IBM Press (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mukhi, N.K., Plebani, P.: Supporting policy-driven behaviors in web services: experiences and issues. In: ICSOC 2004: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Service oriented computing, pp. 322–328. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maximilien, E.M., Singh, M.P.: Reputation and endorsement for web services. SIGecom Exch. 3, 24–31 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zeng, L., Benatallah, B., Dumas, M., Kalagnanam, J., Sheng, Q.Z.: Quality driven web services composition. In: WWW 2003: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web, pp. 411–421. ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maximilien, E.M., Singh, M.P.: Toward autonomic web services trust and selection. In: ICSOC 2004: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Service oriented computing, pp. 212–221. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicolas Gibelin
    • 1
  • Mesaac Makpangou
    • 1
  1. 1.INRIA, Regal ProjectLe ChesnayFrance

Personalised recommendations