COORDINATION 2006: Coordination Models and Languages pp 16-27 | Cite as
Atomic Commit and Negotiation in Service Oriented Computing
Abstract
In this paper we investigate the relationship between two problems, related to distributed systems, that are of particular interest in the context of Service Oriented Computing: atomic commit and negotiation. We will show that there exists a rather strict interdependency between the two problems by discussing how negotiation could be expressed as an instance of the atomic commit problem, and vice versa. To this end we exploit the Contract Net Protocol, a well known negotiation protocol, that will be described by means of the asynchronous pi calculus (Pi-CNP). Besides modeling CNP we also formally describe some basic properties of the CNP protocol.
Keywords
Negotiation Protocol Local Success Local Atomicity Service Orient Computing Message LossPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Roberts, J., Srinivasan, K.: Tentative Hold Protocol Part 1: White Paper (2001), http://www.w3.org/TR/tenthold-1/
- 2.OASIS: Business Transaction Protocol (2002), http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/1184/2002-06-03.BTP_cttee_spec_1.0.pdf
- 3.Cabrera, F., Copeland, G., Cox, B., Freund, T., Klein, J., Storey, T., Thatte, S.: Web Services Transaction (WS-Transaction), http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-transpec/
- 4.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)Google Scholar
- 5.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)Google Scholar
- 6.Dalal, S., Temel, S., Little, M., Potts, M., Webber, J., Storey, T.: Coordinating Business Transactions on the Web. IEEE Internet Computing 7(1), 30–39 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Hadzilacos, V.: On the Relationship Between the Atomic Commitment and Consensus Problems. In: Simons, B., Spector, A.Z. (eds.) Fault-Tolerant Distributed Computing. LNCS, vol. 448, pp. 201–208. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Milner, R.: Communicating and Mobile Systems: the Pi-Calculus. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1989)Google Scholar
- 9.Jennings, N.R., Parsons, S., Sierra, C., Faratin, P.: Automated Negotiation. In: Proceedings of 5th Int Conf. on Practical Application of Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (PAAM 2000), pp. 23–30 (2000)Google Scholar
- 10.FIPA. FIPA Contract Net Interaction Protocol Specification. FIPA (2001)Google Scholar
- 11.Lee, K.J., Chang, Y.S.: Time-Bounded Negation Framework for Multi-Agent Coordination. In: Selected papers from the First Pacific Rim International Workshop on Multi-Agents, Multiagent Platforms, pp. 61–75. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
- 12.Bocchi, L., Wischik, L.: A Process Calculus of Atomic Commit. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 105, 119–132 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Bocchi, L., Ciancarini, P., Lucchi, R.: Atomic Commit and Negotiation in Service Oriented Computing. Technical Report UBLCS-2005-16, University of Bologna, Italy (2005), ftp://ftp.cs.unibo.it/pub/techreports/2005/2005-16.pdf