Native Cloud Applications: Why Monolithic Virtualization Is Not Their Foundation

  • Frank LeymannEmail author
  • Uwe Breitenbücher
  • Sebastian Wagner
  • Johannes Wettinger
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 740)


Due to the current hype around cloud computing, the term ‘native cloud application’ becomes increasingly popular. It suggests an application to fully benefit from all the advantages of cloud computing. Many users tend to consider their applications as cloud native if the application is just bundled as a monolithic virtual machine or container. Even though virtualization is fundamental for implementing the cloud computing paradigm, a virtualized application does not automatically cover all properties of a native cloud application. In this work, which is an extension of a previous paper, we propose a definition of a native cloud application by specifying the set of characteristic architectural properties, which a native cloud application has to provide. We demonstrate the importance of these properties by introducing a typical scenario from current practice that moves an application to the cloud. The identified properties and the scenario especially show why virtualization alone is insufficient to build native cloud applications. We also outline how native cloud applications respect the core principles of service-oriented architectures, which are currently hyped a lot in the form of microservice architectures. Finally, we discuss the management of native cloud applications using container orchestration approaches as well as the cloud standard TOSCA.


  1. 1.
    Fehling, C., Leymann, F., Schumm, D., Konrad, R., Mietzner, R., Pauly, M.: Flexible process-based applications in hybrid clouds. In: Liu, L., Parashar, M., (eds.) IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing, CLOUD 2011, Washington, DC, USA, 4–9 July 2011, pp. 81–88. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fehling, C., Leymann, F., Ruehl, S.T., Rudek, M., Verclas, S.A.W.: Service migration patterns - decision support and best practices for the migration of existing service-based applications to cloud environments. In: 2013 IEEE 6th International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing and Applications, Koloa, HI, USA, 16–18 December 2013, pp. 9–16. IEEE Computer Society (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brandic, I., Dustdar, S., Anstett, T., Schumm, D., Leymann, F., Konrad, R.: Compliant cloud computing (C3): architecture and language support for user-driven compliance management in clouds. In: IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing, CLOUD 2010, Miami, FL, USA, 5–10 July 2010, pp. 244–251 (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Leymann, F., Fehling, C., Wagner, S., Wettinger, J.: Native cloud applications: why virtual machines, images and containers miss the point! In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Cloud Computing and Service Science (CLOSER 2016), Rome, pp. 7–15. SciTePress (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fehling, C., Leymann, F., Retter, R., Schupeck, W., Arbitter, P.: Cloud Computing Patterns - Fundamentals to Design, Build, and Manage Cloud Applications. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Andrikopoulos, V., Binz, T., Leymann, F., Strauch, S.: How to adapt applications for the cloud environment - challenges and solutions in migrating applications to the cloud. Computing 95, 493–535 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Binz, T., Breitenbücher, U., Kopp, O., Leymann, F.: Migration of enterprise applications to the cloud. IT - Information Technology, Special Issue: Architecture of Web Application, vol. 56, pp. 106–111 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fowler, M.: Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mell, P.M., Grance, T.: The NIST definition of cloud computing. Technical report, Gaithersburg, MD, United States (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ornstein, S.M., Crowther, W.R., Kraley, M.F., Bressler, R.D., Michel, A., Heart, F.E.: Pluribus: a reliable multiprocessor. In: AFIPS Conference Proceedings of American Federation of Information Processing Societies: 1975 National Computer Conference, Anaheim, CA, USA, 19–22 May 1975, vol. 44, pp. 551–559. AFIPS Press (1975)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Freemantle, P.: Cloud Native (2010).
  12. 12.
    Mouat, A.: Using Docker: Developing and Deploying Software with Containers. O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fowler, M.: Microservices Resource Guide (2016).
  14. 14.
    Newman, S.: Building Microservices: Designing Fine-Grained Systems, 1st edn. O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Humble, J., Farley, D.: Continuous Delivery: Reliable Software Releases Through Build, Test, and Deployment Automation, 1st edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, Upper Saddle River (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schermann, G., Cito, J., Leitner, P.: All the services large and micro: revisiting industrial practices in services computing. PeerJ PrePrints 3, 36–47 (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    SCS: Self-contained System (SCS) Assembling Software from Independent Systems (2016).
  18. 18.
    Cloud9 IDE Inc.: Cloud9 website (2016).
  19. 19.
    Badger, M.L., Grance, T., Patt-Corner, R., Voas, J.M.: Cloud computing synopsis and recommendations. Technical report, Gaithersburg, MD, USA (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Azeez, A., Perera, S., Gamage, D., Linton, R., Siriwardana, P., Leelaratne, D., Weerawarana, S., Fremantle, P.: Multi-tenant SOA middleware for cloud computing. In: IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing, CLOUD 2010, Miami, FL, USA, 5–10 July 2010, pp. 458–465 (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Amazon: Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) Pricing (2016).
  22. 22.
    OASIS: Topology and Orchestration Specification for Cloud Applications (TOSCA) Version 1.0. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS) (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    OASIS: Topology and Orchestration Specification for Cloud Applications (TOSCA) Primer Version 1.0. (2013)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    OASIS: TOSCA Simple Profile in YAML Version 1.0 - Committee Specification (2016)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Binz, T., Breitenbücher, U., Kopp, O., Leymann, F. Advanced web services. In: Bouguettaya, A., Sheng, Q.Z., Daniel, F. (eds.) TOSCA: Portable Automated Deployment and Management of Cloud Applications, pp. 527–549. Springer, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Leymann, F., Roller, D.: Production Workflow: Concepts and Techniques. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River (2000)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    OASIS: Web Services Business Process Execution Language (WS-BPEL) Version 2.0. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS) (2007)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0. Object Management Group (OMG) (2011)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Binz, T., Breitenbücher, U., Haupt, F., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Nowak, A., Wagner, S.: OpenTOSCA – a runtime for TOSCA-based cloud applications. In: Basu, S., Pautasso, C., Zhang, L., Fu, X. (eds.) ICSOC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8274, pp. 692–695. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-45005-1_62 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Waizenegger, T., et al.: Policy4TOSCA: a policy-aware cloud service provisioning approach to enable secure cloud computing. In: Meersman, R., Panetto, H., Dillon, T., Eder, J., Bellahsene, Z., Ritter, N., Leenheer, P., Dou, D. (eds.) OTM 2013. LNCS, vol. 8185, pp. 360–376. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-41030-7_26 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    EI Maghraoui, K., Meghranjani, A., Eilam, T., Kalantar, M., Konstantinou, A.V.: Model driven provisioning: bridging the gap between declarative object models and procedural provisioning tools. In: Steen, M., Henning, M. (eds.) Middleware 2006. LNCS, vol. 4290, pp. 404–423. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi: 10.1007/11925071_21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mietzner, R.: A method and implementation to define and provision variable composite applications, and its usage in cloud computing. Dissertation, Universitt Stuttgart, Fakult ät Informatik, Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik (2010)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Breitenbücher, U., Binz, T., Képes, K., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Wettinger, J.: Combining declarative and imperative cloud application provisioning based on TOSCA. In: International Conference on Cloud Engineering (IC2E 2014), pp. 87–96. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kopp, O., Binz, T., Breitenbücher, U., Leymann, F.: BPMN4TOSCA: a domain-specific language to model management plans for composite applications. In: Mendling, J., Weidlich, M. (eds.) BPMN 2012. LNBIP, vol. 125, pp. 38–52. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-33155-8_4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kopp, O., Binz, T., Breitenbücher, U., Leymann, F., Michelbach, T.: A domain-specific modeling tool to model management plans for composite applications. In: Proceedings of the 7th Central European Workshop on Services and their Composition (ZEUS 2015), CEUR Workshop Proceedings, pp. 51–54 (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank Leymann
    • 1
    Email author
  • Uwe Breitenbücher
    • 1
  • Sebastian Wagner
    • 1
  • Johannes Wettinger
    • 1
  1. 1.IAAS, University of StuttgartStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations