A Lightweight Infrastructure for Reconfiguring Applications

  • Marco Castaldi
  • Antonio Carzaniga
  • Paola Inverardi
  • Alexander L. Wolf
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2649)


We describe Lira, a lightweight infrastructure for managing dynamic reconfiguration that applies and extends the concepts of network management to component-based, distributed software systems. Lira is designed to perform both component-level reconfigurations and scalable application-level reconfigurations, the former through agents associated with individual components and the latter through a hierarchy of managers. Agents are programmed on a component-by-component basis to respond to reconfiguration requests appropriate for that component. Managers embody the logic for monitoring the state of one or more components, and for determining when and how to execute reconfiguration activities. A simple protocol based on SNMP is used for communication among managers and agents.


IEEE Computer Society Software Architecture Network Management Defense Advance Research Project Agency External Entity 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J.P.A. Almeida, M. Wegdam, M. van Sinderen, and L. Nieuwenhuis. Transparent Dynamic Reconfiguration for CORBA. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Distributed Objects and Applications, pages 197–207. IEEE Computer Society, September 2001.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    T. Batista and N. Rodriguez. Dynamic Reconfiguration of Component-Based Applications. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Software Engineering for Parallel and Distributed Systems, pages 32–39. IEEE Computer Society, June 2000.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Berghoff, O. Drobnik, A. Lingnau, and C. Monch. Agent-Based Configuration Management of Distributed Applications. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Configurable Distributed Systems, pages 52–59. IEEE Computer Society, May 1996.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. Bidan, V. Issarny, T. Saridakis, and A. Zarras. A Dynamic Reconfiguration Service for CORBA. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Configurable Distributed Systems, pages 35–42. IEEE Computer Society, May 1998.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Carzaniga, D.S. Rosenblum, and A.L. Wolf. Design and Evaluation of a Wide-Area Event Notification Service. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 19(3):332–383, August 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. Case, R. Mundy, D. Partain, and B. Stewart. Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet Standard Management Framework. RFC 3410. The Internet Society, December 2002.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Costantini and A. Tocchio. A Logic Programming Language for Multi-Agent Systems. In 8th European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence, number 2424 in Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 1–13. Springer-Verlag, September 2002.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Endler. A Language for Implementing Generic Dynamic Reconfigurations of Distributed Programs. In Proceedings of 12th Brazilian Symposium on Computer Networks, pages 175–187, 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    G. Goldszmidt and Y. Yemini. Distributed Management by Delegation. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 333–340. IEEE Computer Society, May 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R.S. Hall, D.M. Heimbigner, and A.L. Wolf. Evaluating Software Deployment Languages and Schema. In Proceedings of the 1998 International Conference on Software Maintenance, pages 177–185. IEEE Computer Society, November 1998.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R.S. Hall, D.M. Heimbigner, and A.L. Wolf. A Cooperative Approach to Support Software Deployment Using the Software Dock. In Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 174–183. Association for Computer Machinery, May 1999.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D.M. Heimbigner and A.L. Wolf. Post-Deployment Configuration Management. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Software Configuration Management, number 1167 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 272–276. Springer-Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    G.T. Heineman and W.T. Councill, editors. Component-Based Software Engineering: Putting the Pieces Together. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 2001.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hewlett Packard. HP OpenView Family Guide, 1998.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    C. Kalbfleisch, C. Krupczak, R. Presuhn, and J. Saperia. Application Management MIB. RFC 2564. The Internet Society, May 1999.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J.C. Knight, D.M. Heimbigner, A.L. Wolf, A. Carzaniga, J. Hill, and P. Devanbu. The Willow Survivability Architecture. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Survivability Workshop, March 2002.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J.C. Knight, D.M. Heimbigner, A.L. Wolf, A. Carzaniga, J. Hill, P. Devanbu, and M. Gertz. The Willow Architecture: Comprehensive Survivability for Large-Scale Distributed Applications. Technical Report CU-CS-926-01, Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, December 2001.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Kramer and J. Magee. Dynamic Configuration for Distributed Systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-11(4):424–436, April 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Magee and J. Kramer. Self Organising Software Architectures. In Proceedings of the Second International Software Architecture Workshop, pages 35–38, October 1996.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    R. Monson-Haefel. Enterprise JavaBeans. O’Reilly and Associates, 2000.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M.J. Rutherford, K.M. Anderson, A. Carzaniga, D.M. Heimbigner, and A.L. Wolf. Reconfiguration in the Enterprise JavaBean Component Model. In Proceedings of the IFIP/ACM Working Conference on Component Deployment, number 2370 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 67–81. Springer-Verlag, 2002.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Scientific Advisory Board. Building The Joint Battlespace Infosphere. Technical Report SAB-TR-99-02, U.S. Air Force, December 2000.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sun Microsystems, Inc., Palo Alto, California. Java Management Extensions Instrumentation and Agent Specification, v1.0, July 2000.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    S. Waldbusser and P. Grillo. Host Resources MIB. RFC 2790. The Internet Society, March 2000.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    M. Wermelinger. Towards a Chemical Model for Software Architecture Reconfiguration. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Configurable Distributed Systems, pages 111–118. IEEE Computer Society, May 1998.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    A. Young and J. Magee. A Flexible Approach to Evolution of Reconfigurable Systems. In Proceedings of the IEE/IFIP International Workshop on Configurable Distributed Systems, pages 152–163, March 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marco Castaldi
    • 1
  • Antonio Carzaniga
    • 2
  • Paola Inverardi
    • 1
  • Alexander L. Wolf
    • 2
  1. 1.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversita’ dell’AquilaL’AquilaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Colorado at BoulderBoulderUSA

Personalised recommendations