Transactional Aspects in Semantic Based Discovery of Services

  • Laura Bocchi
  • Paolo Ciancarini
  • Davide Rossi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3454)


In a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA), services may need to dynamically discover non-functional properties of possible other services to cooperate with. Among these non-functional properties, transactional support is particularly relevant to enable coordination. In this paper we model the transactional support of Web services in a machine readable format (using OWL-S); in our model transactional support can be defined as negotiable thus requiring a run time multi step interaction among services to agree on the supported transaction type. We use the Business Transaction Protocol (BTP), a distributed transaction protocol, to carry out this negotiation. Specifically, we use an implementation of the bidding negotiation in BTP with the asynchronous pi calculus in order to provide a formal framework for these coordination issues.


Service Orient Architecture Service Description Negotiation Protocol Transaction Manager Resource Broker 
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.
    Booth, D., Haas, H., Brown, A.: Web Services Glossary. Technical report, World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2004),
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Cabrera, L.F., Copeland, G., Freund, T., Klein, J., Langworthy, D., Leymann, F., Orchard, D., Robinson, I., Storey, T., Thatte, S.: Web Services Business Activity Framework (WS-BusinessActivity),
  4. 4.
    Curbera, F., Goland, Y., Klein, J., Leymann, F., Roller, D., Thatte, S., Weerawarana, S.: Business Process Execution Language for Web Services (BPEL4WS1.0). Technical reportGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davis, R., Smith, R.G.: Negotiation as a Metaphor for Distributed Problem Solving. In: Readings in Distributed Artificial Intelligence, pp. 333–356. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kraus, S.: Strategic Negotiation in Multi-Agent Environments. MIT Press, Cambridge(2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Laasri, B., Laasri, H., Lander, S., Lesser, V.: A Generic Model for Intelligent Negotiating Agents. International Journal on Intelligent Cooperative Information Systems 1(2), 291–317 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maudet, N.: Negotiating dialogue games. Journal of autonoumous agents and multi-agent systems 7(2), 229–233 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kraus, S., Wilkenfeld, J., Zlotkin, G.: Multiagent negotiation under time constraints. Artificial Intelligence 75(2), 297–345 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Smith, R.G.: The Contract Net Protocol: High-Level Communication and Control in a Distributed Problem Solver. In: Readings in Distributed Artificial Intelligence, pp. 357–366. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hung, C.K., Li, H., Jeng, J.: WS-Negotiation: An overview of research issues. In: Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2004). IEEE Computer, Los Alamitos (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Global Grid Forum,
  13. 13.
    Andrieux, A., Czajkowski, K., Dan, A., Keahey, K., Ludwig, H., Pruyne, J., Rofrano, J., Tuecke, S., Xu, M.: Web Services Agreement Specification (WS-Agreement),
  14. 14.
    Klein, M., Bernstein, A.: Searching for Services on the Semantic Web Using Process Ontologies. In: Cruz, I., Decker, S., Euzenat, J., McGuinness, D. (eds.) The Emerging Semantic Web - Selected papers from the first Semantic Web Working Symposium, pp. 159–172. IOS press, Amsterdam (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bechhofer, S., Harmelen, F., Hendler, J., Horrocks, D., McGuinnes, I., Patel-Schneider, P., Stein, L.A.O.: Web ontology language reference. Technical report, W3C (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    The DARPA Agent Markup Language,
  18. 18.
    Booth, D., Haas, H., McCabe, F., Newcomer, E., Champion, M., Ferris, C., Orchard, D.: Web Service Architecture. Technical report, World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2004),
  19. 19.
    Foster, I., Kesselman, C., Tuecke, S.: The Anatomy of the Grid: Enabling Scalable Virtual Organizations. International Journal of Supercomputer Applications 15(3) (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bocchi, L., Ciancarini, P., Moretti, R., Presutti, V., Rossi, D.: An OWL-S Based Approach to Express Grid Services Coordination. In: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC 2005). ACM, New York (2005) (To appear)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
    Bocchi, L., Laneve, C., Zavattaro, G.: A calculus for long running transactions. In: Najm, E., Nestmann, U., Stevens, P. (eds.) FMOODS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2884, pp. 124–138. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bruni, R., Melgratti, H., Montanari, U.: Nested commits for mobile calculi extending join. In: Proceedings of 3rd IFIP International Conference on Theoretical Computer Science: Exploring New Frontiers of Theoretical Informatics (IFIP TCS 2004), pp. 563–576 (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Laneve, C., Zavattaro, G.: Foundations of web transactions. In: Sassone, V. (ed.) FOSSACS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3441, pp. 282–298. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Milner, R.: Communicating and Mobile Systems: the Pi-Calculus. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1989)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bocchi, L.: Compositional Nested Long Running Transactions. In: Wermelinger, M., Margaria-Steffen, T. (eds.) FASE 2004. LNCS, vol. 2984, pp. 195–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gray, J.: The Transaction Concept: Virtues and Limitations. In: Proceedings of Very Large Data Bases, pp. 179–201 (1981)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Garcia-Molina, H., Sagas, S.K.: Proceedings of the 1987 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data, pp. 249–259. ACM Press, New York (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Garcia-Molina, H., Gawlick, D., Klein, J., Kleissner, K., Salem, K.: Modeling Long-Running Activities as Nested Sagas. Data Eng. 14(1), 14–18 (1991)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Berger, M., Honda, K.: The Two-Phase Commitment Protocol in an Extended Picalculus. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 39(1), 105–130 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Le Fessant, F., Maranget, L.: Compiling Join-Patterns. In: Proceedings of High- Level Concurrent Languages (HLCL 1998). Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 16. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laura Bocchi
    • 1
  • Paolo Ciancarini
    • 1
  • Davide Rossi
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Science dell’InformazioneUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations