Advertisement

Towards Adapting Choreography-Based Service Compositions Through Enterprise Integration Patterns

  • Amleto Di Salle
  • Francesco Gallo
  • Alexander Perucci
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9509)

Abstract

The Future Internet is becoming a reality, providing a large-scale computing environments where a virtually infinite number of available services can be composed so as to fit users’ needs. Modern service-oriented applications will be more and more often built by reusing and assembling distributed services. A key enabler for this vision is then the ability to automatically compose and dynamically coordinate software services. Service choreographies are an emergent Service Engineering (SE) approach to compose together and coordinate services in a distributed way. When mismatching third-party services are to be composed, obtaining the distributed coordination and adaptation logic required to suitably realize a choreography is a non-trivial and error prone task. Automatic support is then needed. In this direction, this paper leverages previous work on the automatic synthesis of choreography-based systems, and describes our preliminary steps towards exploiting Enterprise Integration Patterns to deal with a form of choreography adaptation.

Keywords

Service Composition Architectural Style Interaction Protocol Candidate Service Business Process Modeling Notation 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgment

This research work has been supported by the Ministry of Education, Universities and Research, prot. 2012E47TM2 (project IDEAS - Integrated Design and Evolution of Adaptive Systems), by the European Union’s H2020 Programme under grant agreement number 644178 (project CHOReVOLUTION - Automated Synthesis of Dynamic and Secured Choreographies for the Future Internet), and by the Ministry of Economy and Finance, Cipe resolution n. 135/2012 (project INCIPICT - INnovating CIty Planning through Information and Communication Technologies).

References

  1. 1.
    European Commission: Digital Agenda for Europe - Future Internet Research and Experimentation (FIRE) initiative (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Autili, M., Di Ruscio, D., Di Salle, A., Inverardi, P., Tivoli, M.: A model-based synthesis process for choreography realizability enforcement. In: Cortellessa, V., Varró, D. (eds.) FASE 2013 (ETAPS 2013). LNCS, vol. 7793, pp. 37–52. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Autili, M., Di Salle, A., Tivoli, M.: Synthesis of resilient choreographies. In: Gorbenko, A., Romanovsky, A., Kharchenko, V. (eds.) SERENE 2013. LNCS, vol. 8166, pp. 94–108. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Salle, A.D., Inverardi, P., Perucci, A.: Towards adaptable and evolving service choreography in the future Internet. In: IEEE Services, pp. 333–337 (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Autili, M., Inverardi, P., Tivoli, M.: Automated synthesis of service choreographies. IEEE Softw. 32(1), 50–57 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hohpe, G., Woolf, B.: Enterprise Integration Patterns: Designing, Building, and Deploying Messaging Solutions - Printing 2011. Addison-Wesley Longman, Boston (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Basu, S., Bultan, T.: Choreography conformance via synchronizability. In: Proceedings of WWW (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Calvanese, D., Giacomo, G.D., Lenzerini, M., Mecella, M., Patrizi, F.: Automatic service composition and synthesis: the roman model. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 31(3), 18–22 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hallé, S., Bultan, T.: Realizability analysis for message-based interactions using shared-state projections. In: Proceedings of FSE, pp. 27–36 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pathak, J., Lutz, R., Honavar, V.: Moscoe: an approach for composing web services through iterative reformulation of functional specifications. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Tools 17, 109–138 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Salaün, G.: Generation of service wrapper protocols from choreography specifications. In: Proceedings of SEFM (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Poizat, P., Salaün, G.: Checking the realizability of BPMN 2.0 choreographies. In: Proceedings of SAC 2012 (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gössler, G., Salaün, G.: Realizability of choreographies for services interacting asynchronously. In: Arbab, F., Ölveczky, P.C. (eds.) FACS 2011. LNCS, vol. 7253, pp. 151–167. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Basu, S., Bultan, T., Ouederni, M.: Deciding choreography realizability. In: Proceedings of POPL. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Güdemann, M., Poizat, P., Salaün, G., Dumont, A.: VerChor: a framework for verifying choreographies. In: Cortellessa, V., Varró, D. (eds.) FASE 2013 (ETAPS 2013). LNCS, vol. 7793, pp. 226–230. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Salaün, G., Bultan, T., Roohi, N.: Realizability of choreographies using process algebra encodings. IEEE TSC 5(3), 290–304 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ouederni, M., Salaün, G., Bultan, T.: Compatibility checking for asynchronously communicating software. In: Fiadeiro, J.L., Liu, Z., Xue, J. (eds.) FACS 2013. LNCS, vol. 8348, pp. 310–328. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Basu, S., Bultan, T.: Automatic verification of interactions in asynchronous systems with unbounded buffers. In: Proceedings of ASE, pp. 743–754 (2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Güdemann, M., Poizat, P., Salaün, G., Dumont, A.: VerChor: a framework for verifying choreographies. In: Cortellessa, V., Varró, D. (eds.) FASE 2013 (ETAPS 2013). LNCS, vol. 7793, pp. 226–230. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Güdemann, M., Salaün, G., Ouederni, M.: Counterexample guided synthesis of monitors for realizability enforcement. In: Chakraborty, S., Mukund, M. (eds.) ATVA 2012. LNCS, vol. 7561, pp. 238–253. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shaw, M., Garlan, D.: Software Architecture - Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1996)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Autili, M., Ruscio, D.D., Salle, A.D., Perucci, A.: Choreosynt: enforcing choreography realizability in the future Internet. In: Proceedings of FSE, pp. 723–726 (2014)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bertolino, A., Inverardi, P., Pelliccione, P., Tivoli, M.: Automatic synthesis of behavior protocols for composable web-services. In: Proceedings of ESEC/FSE (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Calvert, K.L., Lam, S.S.: Formal methods for protocol conversion. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 8(1), 16 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lam, S.S.: Correction to “protocol conversion”. IEEE TSE 14(9), 1376 (1988)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vaculín, R., Sycara, K.: Towards automatic mediation of OWL-S process models. In: Proceedings of IEEE Web Services (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Vaculín, R., Neruda, R., Sycara, K.: An agent for asymmetric process mediation in open environments. In: Kowalczyk, R., Huhns, M.N., Klusch, M., Maamar, Z., Vo, Q.B. (eds.) Service-Oriented Computing: Agents, Semantics, and Engineering. LNCS, vol. 5006, pp. 104–117. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Spitznagel, B., Garlan, D.: A compositional formalization of connector wrappers. In: Proceedings of ICSE (2003)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Passerone, R., Alfaro, L.D., Henzinger, T.A., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.L.: Convertibility verification and converter synthesis: two faces of the same coin. In: Proceedings of ICCAD (2002)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bennaceur, A., Issarny, V.: Automated synthesis of mediators to support component interoperability. IEEE TSE 41(3), 221–240 (2015)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Do, H.H., Melnik, S., Rahm, E.: Comparison of schema matching evaluations. In: Web, Web-Services, and Database Systems, pp. 221–237 (2002)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Do, H.H., Rahm, E.: COMA - a system for flexible combination of schema matching approaches. In: Proceedings of VLDB, pp. 610–621 (2002)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Massmann, S., Engmann, D., Rahm, E.: COMA++: results for the ontology alignment contest OAEI 2006. In: Proceedings of OM/ISWC (2006)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Paolucci, M., Kawamura, T., Payne, T.R., Sycara, K.: Semantic matching of web services capabilities. In: Horrocks, I., Hendler, J. (eds.) ISWC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2342, pp. 333–347. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Schumacher, M., Fernandez-Buglioni, E., Hybertson, D., Buschmann, F., Sommerlad, P.: Security Patterns Integrating Security and Systems Engineering. Wiley, Verlag (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amleto Di Salle
    • 1
  • Francesco Gallo
    • 1
  • Alexander Perucci
    • 1
  1. 1.University of L’AquilaL’AquilaItaly

Personalised recommendations