A Distributed Self-management Service

IntroductionArchitecture

Policy languageEvaluation

Conclusions

A Distributed Self-management Service

Ioanna Tsalouchidou

Universitat Politecnica De CatalunyaKungliska Tekniska Hogskolan

[email protected]

Supervisor: Leandro Navarro Moldes

July 1, 2013

1 / 31



Conclusions

Overview

1. Introduction

2. Architecture

3. Policy language

4. Evaluation

5. Conclusions

2 / 31



Conclusions

Autonomic ComputingThe CONFINE TestbedMotivation

Overview

1. Introduction1.1 Autonomic Computing1.2 The CONFINE Testbed1.3 Motivation

3 / 31



Conclusions


Autonomic Computing

Self-configuration: install/configure according to policies.

Self-optimization: parameter tuning to perform optimally.

Self-healing: identify, trace, diagnose and repair the causefailure.

Self-protection: anticipate, detect and auto-defend againstproblems

4 / 31



Conclusions


Overview of the testbed

CONFINE: Community Network Testbed for the FutureInternet

Community networks

Scale up thousands of nodes, distributed geographically

Users allocate resources to run experiments

Multiple experiments run concurrently, sharing resources

5 / 31



Conclusions


Architecture

6 / 31



Conclusions


Motivation

Address possible challenges in CONFINE testbed

Predefined policies and automatic actions

Self-management system for CONFINE testbed

Policy specification language

7 / 31



Conclusions


Related Work

Self management: MyOps, Puppet

Policy languages: KAoS, Rei, Ponder

8 / 31



Conclusions

The Monitoring SystemThe Self-management system

Overview

2. Architecture2.1 The Monitoring System2.2 The Self-management system

9 / 31



Conclusions


The monitoring system

Large scale of infrequently-used data

Slice and sliver specific information

Metrics provided by the operating system or synthesized

Receiver-pull model

10 / 31



Conclusions


Architecture of the monitoring system

11 / 31



Conclusions


The Self-management system

Self-protection

Cooperating with the monitoring system

Components on server and research devices

Collect, policy and action components

12 / 31



Conclusions


Architecture of the self-management system

13 / 31



Conclusions

TheorySyntax

Overview

3. Policy language3.1 Theory3.2 Syntax

14 / 31



Conclusions

TheorySyntax

Objectives of the language

Simple, extensible, expressive, easy to process

Everything allowed unless explicitly prohibited

If-then-else logic

Describe the stable state of the testbed nodes

Define actions when the system exceeds the stable state

15 / 31



Conclusions

TheorySyntax

The syntax of the language

Define the resource of reference

CPU, memory, network

One general block for each resource

Smaller blocks within the general for each policy

16 / 31



Conclusions

TheorySyntax

Example of the syntax I

17 / 31



Conclusions

TheorySyntax

Example of the syntax II

18 / 31



Conclusions

The MethodScenario CPU

Overview

4. Evaluation4.1 The Method4.2 Scenario CPU

19 / 31



Conclusions


Method

Policy scenarios and experiments

No performance metrics

Quality of the design

20 / 31



Conclusions


Method

Scenarios for CPU

Definition of the stable state

Actions

21 / 31



Conclusions


Scenario CPU I

22 / 31



Conclusions


Scenario CPU II

23 / 31



Conclusions


Scenario CPU II

24 / 31



Conclusions

DiscussionFuture WorkConclusion

Overview

5. Conclusions5.1 Discussion5.2 Future Work5.3 Conclusion

25 / 31



Conclusions


Discussion: Self-management system

Self-management system

Cooperation with the monitoring system

Architecture: server and node side

Sliver and slice view

26 / 31



Conclusions


Discussion: Policy language

Policy specification language

Easy to comprehend, expressive and extensible

Define resource, stable state, exceeding duration, action

27 / 31



Conclusions


Future Work

Aggregation of data during duration period

More fine-grained actions

Prioritizing and grouping

28 / 31



Conclusions


Conclusion

Autonomic computing

CONFINE testbed

Self-management system for CONFINE testbed

Policy Specification language

29 / 31



Conclusions


References I

Confine project.

http://confine-project.eu/.

T. Koch, C. Krell, and B. Kramer.

Policy definition language for automated management of distributed systems.In Systems Management, 1996., Proceedings of Second IEEE International Workshop on, pages 55–64,1996.

Planetlab.

http://www.planet-lab.org/.

Stephen Soltesz, Marc Fiuczynski, and Larry Peterson.

Myops: A monitoring and management framework for planetlab deployments.

Gianluca Tonti, Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, Renia Jeffers, Rebecca Montanari, Niranjan Suri, and Andrzej Uszok.

Semantic web languages for policy representation and reasoning: A comparison of kaos, rei, and ponder.In International Semantic Web Conference, pages 419–437, 2003.

30 / 31

http://confine-project.eu/

http://www.planet-lab.org/



Conclusions


A Distributed Self-management Service

Ioanna Tsalouchidou

Universitat Politecnica De CatalunyaKungliska Tekniska Hogskolan

[email protected]

Supervisor: Leandro Navarro Moldes

July 1, 2013

31 / 31

A Distributed Self-management Service

Technology

Transcript of A Distributed Self-management Service