Ontology-Based Integration of Management Behaviour and Information Definitions Using SWRL and OWL

  • Antonio Guerrero
  • Víctor A. Villagrá
  • Jorge E. López de Vergara
  • Julio Berrocal
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3775)


Current network management architectures are using different models to define management information objects. These definitions actually also include, in a non-formal way, the definition of some behaviour information that a manager should accomplish related to the managed objects. So, a manager is not able to make an automatic processing of this behaviour information. Prior research work proposed the use of formal ontology languages, such as OWL, as a way to make a semantic integration of different management information definitions. This paper goes further proposing a formal definition of the different management behaviour specifications integrated with the management information definitions. Thus, usual behaviour definitions included implicitly in the management information definitions and explicitly in policy definitions can be expressed formally, and included with the information definitions. This paper focuses on the definition of behaviour rules in management information with SWRL, a rule language defined to complement OWL functionality.


  1. 1.
    López de Vergara, J.E., Villagrá, V.A., Asensio, J.I., Berrocal, J.: Ontologies: Giving Semantics to Network Management Models. IEEE Network 17(3), 15–21 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    López de Vergara, J.E., Villagrá, V.A., Berrocal, J.: Benefits of Using Ontologies in the Management of High Speed Networks. In: Mammeri, Z., Lorenz, P. (eds.) HSNMC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3079, pp. 1007–1018. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Smith, M.K., Welty, C., McGuinness, D.L.: OWL Web Ontology Language Guide, W3C Recommendation (February 10, 2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    López de Vergara, J.E., Villagrá, V.A., Berrocal, J.: Applying the Web Ontology Language to management information definitions. IEEE Communications Magazine 42(7), 68–74 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Boley, H., Tabet, S., Grosof, B., Dean, M.: SWRL: A Semantic Web Rule Language Combining OWL and RuleML, W3C Member Submission (May 21, 2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Patel-Schneider, P.F., Hayes, P., Horrocks, I.: OWL Web Ontology Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax, W3C Recommendation (February 10, 2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rule Markup Initiative:
  8. 8.
    Westerinen, A., Schnizlein, J., Strassner, J., Scherling, M., Quinn, B., Herzog, S., Huynh, A., Carlson, M., Perry, J., Waldbusser, S.: Terminology for Policy-Based Management, IETF Request For Comments 3198 (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elliott, C., Harrington, D., Jason, J., Schoenwaelder, J., Strauss, F., Weiss, W.: SMIng Objectives, IETF Request For Comments 3216 (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Martin, D. (ed.): OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services, W3C Member Submission (November 22, 2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Damianou, N., Dulay, N., Lupu, E., Sloman, M.: The PONDER Policy Specification Language. In: Sloman, M., Lobo, J., Lupu, E.C. (eds.) POLICY 2001. LNCS, vol. 1995, pp. 18–39. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonio Guerrero
    • 1
  • Víctor A. Villagrá
    • 1
  • Jorge E. López de Vergara
    • 2
  • Julio Berrocal
    • 1
  1. 1.Dpto. de Ingeniería de Sistemas TelemáticosUniversidad Politécnica de MadridSpain
  2. 2.Dpto. de Ingeniería InformáticaUniversidad Autónoma de MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations