Wireless Web Services using Mobile Agents and Ontologies
description
Transcript of Wireless Web Services using Mobile Agents and Ontologies
Wireless Web Services using Wireless Web Services using Mobile Agents and OntologiesMobile Agents and Ontologies
V. Baousis, E. Zavitsanos, V. Spiliopoulos, S. Hadjiefthymiades, L. Merakos, G. Veronis
Pervasive Computing Research GroupCommunication Networks Laboratory
Dept. of Informatics & Telecommunications, University of Athens, Greece.
ICPS 2006
Lyon, France, June 26 – 29, 2006
Outline
Introduction
Platform overview
Performance evaluation
Conclusions -Future work
Introduction
We propose the integration of Mobile Agents (MA) and Semantically enriched Web Services (SWS) for wireless users who access SWS in the fixed network.
MA transport themselves from one system to another and invoke SWS while being in the same host or network with the SWS.
The system uses an enhanced WS registry that provides semantic matching to incoming service queries and the published SWS descriptions.
Platform overview
USR :User Service RequestorMA :Mobile AgentRSA :Registry Stationary Agent SWSR :Semantic Web Services RegistryWSP : Web Service ProviderPSA : Provider Stationary Agent
Transport medium
SWSR
Published services
WSP
WSP
Client System
Laptop
Users
MA creation
MA gets a list of Web services MA executes the WS
MA executes the WS
WSP
MA executes the WS
MA brings the service results
USR
RSA
USR
PSA
PSA
Service scenario1.A user accesses the system and
places service requests specifying some criteria.
2.Creation of a MA that migrates to the registry to find the WS that best meets the user requirements.
3.Service registry allows for a capability search to be performed, since it is enriched with semantic information.
4.The MA, after acquiring the WS listing and technical details, migrates to service provider (s), invokes the WS and collects the results
5. MA delivers the results to the user.
• The MA route may vary, depending on the user’s preferences and the network topology.
• WS parallel or serial execution by MA
• WS execution locally or remotely
User representative in the fixed
network Moves, finds, executes SWS
and delivers results to the user. May spawn clones to execute
the selected WS in parallel. Important components are:
The data state contains the information carried by the MA during migrations.
The policies specifies the autonomous behaviour of the MA (migration, cloning).
The matching engine is responsible for post-processing the service registry query results.
Mobile Agent (MA)
MA- Policy Management component
Communication Service enables the MA to interact with other network entities.
Monitoring Service filters incoming system messages.
Event Service handles events concerning policy changes.
Trigger Service updates the policy repository when a policy change occurs.
Specification service is responsible for fulfilling this task.
Mobile Agent
Policy Management Component
MonitoringService
EventService
Communication Service
TriggerService
SpecificationService
Policy Repository
SW Services Registry (SWSR)
Consists of the RSA, the matchmaking tool and the UDDI registry.
The Matchmaker enhances the UDDI by adding capability-based discovery and in combination with Racer, processes the OWL ontologies.
Semantic information in SWS descriptions are passed to the OWL-S matchmaking engine.
The Matchmaker maps the OWL-S service description to UDDI.
Registry Stationary Agent (RSA)
Acts as a broker between the MA and the service registry.
Implements part of the registry’s functionality and serves MA’s requests.
MA does not have to be aware of the registry implementation details.
Provider Stationary Agent (PSA)
Resides in the host offering a SWS.
Wraps the SWS functionality and delivers service results to MA
Communicates with the SWS through SOAP.
MA communicates with PSA with RMI.
PSA existence is indicated in the WS description
MA need not be SOAP fluent
PSA methods are multi-threaded
Web Service Provider (WSP)
Provides the SWS
SWS expressed in WSDL and OWL-S.
WSDL (Service grounding)
OWL-S (Service profile and model).
SWS can expose a PSA to act as delegate and interact with the user’s MA
Performance EvaluationWe have developed and evaluated the following system variants:
A WS system implemented with the “Conventional WS Business Model” (WSBM).
Our MA framework with stationary agents in Service registry and Service providers - (WITH PSA.)
Our MA framework without stationary agents in Service registry and Service providers - (NO PSA.)
A hybrid system, where some Service Providers accommodate a Stationary agent, while others do not (Hybrid.)
N
iiiMA ITSPMSPTRITTST
1
)(
N
iiITSPRITTST
1WSBM
Terms
RIT : Registry Interaction Time
MSPTi: Migration to the ith Service Provider Time
ITSPi : Interaction Time with the ith Service Provider
Performance Evaluation test bed
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1 10 100 1000
Service results size (KB)
Mig
rati
on
tim
e (m
sec)
Poly. (WITH PSA)
Poly. (NO PSA)
Poly. (HYBRID)
1
32
1
3
2
Migration Time
“With PSA” system exhibits constantly less migration time from the hybrid approach and the latter exhibits constantly less from the “No PSA”.
“With PSA” system the MA agent does not have to be SOAP fluent i.e., it does not have to carry extra code in order to support such communication.
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
1 10 100 1000Service results size (KB)
Inte
ra
cti
on
tim
e (
ms
ec
)
Poly. (WITH PSA)
Poly. (NO PSA)
Poly. (HYBRID)
Poly. (WSBM)
Poly. (WITH PSA (CL))
Poly. (NO PSA (CL))
Poly. (HYBRID (CL))
1
6
5
7
6
5
4
3
2
7
1
4
3
2
Interaction Time
Better performance sequence: WSBM, “With PSA”, “Hybrid” and “No PSA” system. The same performance sequence is observed when CL is enabled (lines 5,7,6).
Systems with PSA communicate faster than systems communicating with SOAP. The better inter-agent communication is attributed to the Mobile Agent Platform
used, where agents communicate with synchronous inter-agent message passing.
Total Service Time (TST)
Besides WSBM, the system with the lowest service time is that having PSA and MA cloning enabled.
MA cloning increases the Interaction Time between the MA and the WS but, eventually, entails considerable improvement to the system (due to WS parallel execution).
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
1 10 100 1000
Service results size (KB)
To
tal S
ervi
ce T
ime
(sec
)
Poly. (WITH PSA)
Poly. (NO PSA)
Poly. (HYBRID)
Poly. (WSBM)
Poly. (WITH PSA+CL)
Poly. (NO PSA+CL)
Poly. (HYBRID+CL)
1
4
5
7
2
3
6
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
Conclusions-Future work A framework for wireless access to semantically enriched WS using
MA. The main advantages of the system are :
1. Users invoke a set of services with only one interaction with the fixed network
2. User off-line operation, 3. Better resource utilization 4. MA dynamic behaviour improves system robustness and fault tolerance, 5. New services, agents, users and service registries can be easily
integrated to the framework thus providing an expandable, open system.
Future work Study of agent mobility for efficient composition of SWS invocation
(implement routing algorithms and considering network status and topology).
Integration with SNMP agents for network performance monitoring.
Thank you for your attention…
Questions?
http://p-comp.di.uoa.gr, http://cnl.di.uoa.gr
ICPS 2006
Lyon, France, June 26 – 29, 2006