Cloud computing has developed into a more acceptable computing paradigm for implementing scalable infrastructure resources given on-demand in a pay-by-use basis. Self-adaptable cloud resources are needed to meet users application needs defined by Service Level Agreements (SLAs) and to limit the amount of human interactions with the processing environment. Sufficient SLA monitoring techniques and timely discovery of possible SLA violations are of principal importance for both cloud providers and cloud customers. The identification of possible violations of SLA is done by analyzing predefined service level objectives together by using knowledgebases for managing and preventing such violations. In this paper we propose a new architecture for the detection of SLA violation and also for the re-negotiation of established SLAs in the case of multiple SLA violations. This re-negotiation of SLAs will really help to limit the over provisioning of resources and thus leads to the optimum usage of resources. As a consolidation the proposed architecture may yield maximized Business Level Objectives (BLOs) to the cloud providers.


Cloud Computing Cloud Service Service Level Agreement Cloud Provider Cloud Infrastructure 
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.
    Boniface, M.J., Phillips, S.C., Sanchez-Macian, A., Surridge, M.: Dynamic service provisioning using GRIA sLAs. In: Di Nitto, E., Ripeanu, M. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4907, pp. 56–67. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buyya, R., Yeo, C.S., Venugopal, S., Broberg, J., Brandic, I.: Cloud computing and emerging it platforms: Vision, hype, and reality for delivering computing as the 5th utility. Future Generation Computer Systems 25(6), 599–616 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Comuzzi, M., Kotsokalis, C., Spanoudakis, G., Yahyapour, R.: Establishing and monitoring slas in complex service based systems. In: IEEE International Conference on Web Services, ICWS 2009, pp. 783–790. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dobson, G., Sanchez-Macian, A.: Towards unified qos/sla ontologies. In: IEEE Services Computing Workshops, SCW 2006, pp. 169–174. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Emeakaroha, V.C., Brandic, I., Maurer, M., Dustdar, S.: Low level metrics to high level slas-lom2his framework: Bridging the gap between monitored metrics and sla parameters in cloud environments. In: 2010 International Conference on High Performance Computing and Simulation (HPCS), pp. 48–54. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Emeakaroha, V.C., Netto, M.A., Calheiros, R.N., Brandic, I., Buyya, R., De Rose, C.A.: Towards autonomic detection of sla violations in cloud infrastructures. Future Generation Computer Systems 28(7), 1017–1029 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Frutos, H.M., Kotsiopoulos, I.: Brein: Business objective driven reliable and intelligent grids for real business. IBIS 8, 39–41 (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hasselmeyer, P., Koller, B., Schubert, L., Wieder, P.: Towards SLA-supported resource management. In: Gerndt, M., Kranzlmüller, D. (eds.) HPCC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4208, pp. 743–752. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Koller, B., Schubert, L.: Towards autonomous sla management using a proxy-like approach. Multiagent and Grid Systems 3(3), 313–325 (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Massie, M.L., Chun, B.N., Culler, D.E.: The ganglia distributed monitoring system: design, implementation, and experience. Parallel Computing 30(7), 817–840 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Redl, C., Breskovic, I., Brandic, I., Dustdar, S.: Automatic sla matching and provider selection in grid and cloud computing markets. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM/IEEE 13th International Conference on Grid Computing, pp. 85–94. IEEE Computer Society (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wood, T., Shenoy, P., Venkataramani, A., Yousif, M.: Sandpiper: Black-box and gray-box resource management for virtual machines. Computer Networks 53(17), 2923–2938 (2009)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maurer, M., Breskovic, I., Emeakaroha, V.C., Brandic, I.: Revealing the mape loop for the autonomic management of cloud infrastructures. In: 2011 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC), pp. 147–152. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Erdil, D.C.: Dependable autonomic cloud computing with information proxies. In: 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing Workshops and Phd Forum (IPDPSW), pp. 1518–1524. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    ESPER, Event Stream Processing Engine,
  16. 16.
    Foundation of Self-governing ICT Infrastructures (FoSII),
  17. 17.
    Brandic, I., Music, D., Dustdar, S.: Service mediation and negotiation bootstrapping as first achievements towards self-adaptable grid and cloud services. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference Industry Session on Grids Meets Autonomic Computing, pp. 1–8. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Koller, B., Schubert, L.: Towards autonomous sla management using a proxy-like approach. Multiagent and Grid Systems 3(3), 313–325 (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brandic, I., Music, D., Leitner, P., Dustdar, S.: vieSLAF framework: Enabling adaptive and versatile SLA-management. In: Altmann, J., Buyya, R., Rana, O.F. (eds.) GECON 2009. LNCS, vol. 5745, pp. 60–73. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Java Messaging Service,

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Anithakumari
    • 1
  • K. Chandra Sekaran
    • 1
  1. 1.NITKMangloreIndia

Personalised recommendations