Advertisement

Using Software Agent Negotiation for Service Selection

  • Claudia Di Napoli
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4729)

Abstract

The management of computational resources is becoming a crucial aspect in new generation distributed computing systems like the Grid because of the decentralized, heterogeneous and autonomous nature of these resources. As such they cannot be managed by adopting a centralized approach, but more sophisticated computing methodologies are necessary. In this paper we propose to use software agent negotiation to select services necessary to compose Grid applications. In particular, we propose an automated negotiation mechanism to select the service providers that meet the requirements of service consumers on the provision of multiple interconnected services. The negotiation mechanism allows for the evaluation of dependent issues that are negotiated upon when multiple interconnected services are required, and it relies on an iterative process so to improve the possibility of reaching an agreement by letting both service consumers and providers to exchange more proposals and counter–proposals in order to accommodate to the dynamic and changing nature of Grid environments.

Keywords

Service Agent Service Level Agreement Service Selection Software Agent Grid Resource 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Foster, I., Kesselmann, K.: The Grid: Blueprint for a New Computing Infrastructure. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buyya, R., Abramson, D., Giddy, J.: An economy driven resource management architecture for global computational power grids. In: PDPTA 2000. Proceedings of The 2000 International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Processing Techniques and Applications, Las Vegas, USA (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schwiegelshohn, U., Wieder, P., Yahyapour, R.: Resource management for future generation grids. CoreGRID Series 3, 99–112 (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Foster, I., Kesselman, C., Nick, J., Tuecke, S.: The physiology of the grid: An open grid service architecture for distributed system integration. Technical report Open Grid Service Infrastructure WG (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Roure, D., Jennings, N.R., Shadbolt, N.: The Semantic Grid: A future e–Science infrastructure, pp. 437–470. Wiley, Chichester (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Foster, I., Jennings, N.R., Kesselman, C.: Brain meets brawn: Why grid and agents need each other. In: Proc. 3rd AAMAS, pp. 8–15 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jennings, N.: An agent–based approach for building complex software systems. Communication of the ACM 44(4), 35–41 (2001)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Foster, I., Kesselman, C., Tuecke, S.: The anatomy of the grid: Enabling scalable virtual organizations. The International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications 15(3), 200–222 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Czajkowski, K., Foster, I., Kesselman, C., Sander, V., Tuecke, S.: Snap: A protocol for negotiating service level agreements and coordinating resource management in distributed systems. In: Feitelson, D.G., Rudolph, L., Schwiegelshohn, U. (eds.) JSSPP 2002. LNCS, vol. 2537, pp. 153–183. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    WG, G.: Grid resource allocation agreement protocol (graap) working group, http://www.fz-juelich.de/zam/RD/coop/ggf/graap/graap-wg.html
  11. 11.
    Lomuscio, A., Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R.: A classification scheme for negotiation in electronic commerce. Int. Journal of Group Decision and Negotiation 12(1), 31–56 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li, J., Yahyapour, R.: Negotiation strategies for grid scheduling. In: Chung, Y.-C., Moreira, J.E. (eds.) GPC 2006. LNCS, vol. 3947, pp. 42–52. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Li, Z., Parashar, M.: An agent–based infrastructure for autonomic composition of grid applications. An International Journal 1(4), 183–195 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smith, R.G.: The contract net protocol: High–level communication and control in a distributed problem solver. IEEE Trans. on Computers 29(12), 1104–1113 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nassif, L.N., Nogueira, J.M., de Andrade, F.V.: Distributed resource selection in grid using decision theory. In: CCGrid 2007. Seventh IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid, pp. 327–334. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ouelhadj, D., Garibaldi, J., MacLaren, J., Sakellariou, R., Krishnakumar, K.: A multi–agent infrastructure and a service level agreement negotiation protocol for robust scheduling in grid computing. In: Sloot, P.M.A., Hoekstra, A.G., Priol, T., Reinefeld, A., Bubak, M. (eds.) EGC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3470, pp. 651–660. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Buyya, R., Vazhkudai, S.: Compute power market: Towards a market–oriented grid. In: CCGrid 2001. Proceedings of First IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid, Brisbane, Australia (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudia Di Napoli
    • 1
  1. 1.Istituto di Cibernetica “E. Caianiello” - C.N.R., Via Campi Flegrei, 34, 80078 Pozzuoli (Napoli)Italy

Personalised recommendations