Utilising Alternative Application Configurations in Context- and QoS-Aware Mobile Middleware

  • Sten A. Lundesgaard
  • Ketil Lund
  • Frank Eliassen
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4025)


State-of-the-art dynamic middleware uses information about the environment in order to evaluate alternative configurations of an application and select one according to some criteria. In the context of applications sensitive to Quality of Service, we have identified the need for a platform independent description of configurations that includes non-functional behaviour, and that allows handling of a large number of application configurations. In this paper, we present a modelling principle and a service plan concept, which together represents such a description. The modelling principle and plan concept extend state-of-the-art with i) a model of the alternative configurations that ensure a minimum of reconfiguration steps; ii) a specification that contains information elements of the configuration, dependencies to the environment, and QoS characteristics; and iii) a platform independent specification. In the paper, we also perform a qualitative assessment of our approach, and we describe a proof-of-concept implementation.


Service Composition Service Plan Service Type Service Configuration Alternative Configuration 
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.


  1. 1.
    Coulson, G., Blair, G., Clarke, M., Parlavanzas, N.: The design of a configurable and reconfigurable middleware platform. Distr. Computing Journal 15, 109–126 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roman, M., Kon, F., Campbell, R.: Reflective Middleware, From Your Desk to Your Hand. IEEE Distributed Systems Online 2(5) (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huhns, M.N., Singh, M.P.: Service-Oriented Computing: Key Concepts and Principles. IEEE Internet Computing 9(1), 75–81 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bradbury, J., Cordy, J., Dingel, J., Wermelinger, M.: A Survey of Self-Management in Dynamic Software Architecture Specification. In: Proc. of the ACM SIGSOFT International Workshop on Self-Managed Systems, pp. 28–33 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Amundsen, S., Eliassen, F.: Combined Resource and Context Model for QoS-aware Mobile Middleware. In: Grass, W., Sick, B., Waldschmidt, K. (eds.) ARCS 2006. LNCS, vol. 3894. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Amundsen, S., Lund, K., Eliassen, F., Staehli, R.: QuA: Platform-Managed QoS for Component Architecture. In: Proc. of the Norwegian Informatics Conference, pp. 55–66 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Solberg, A., Amundsen, S., Aagedal, J., Eliassen, F.: A Framework for QoS-aware Service Composition. In: Proc. of ACM International Conference on Service Oriented Computing, ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Medvidovic, N., Taylor, R.N.: A Framework for Classifying and Comparing Architecture Description Languages. In: Jazayeri, M. (ed.) ESEC 1997 and ESEC-FSE 1997. LNCS, vol. 1301, pp. 60–76. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Garlan, D., Monroe, R., Wile, D.: ACME: Architectural Description of Component-based Systems. In: Foundations of Component-based Systems, pp. 47–68. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Magee, J., Kramer, J.: Dynamic Structure in Software Architectures. In: Proc. of ACM SIGSOFT 1996: 4th Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, pp. 3–14 (1996)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Batista, T., Joolia, A., Coulson, G.: Managing Dynamic Reconfiguration in Component-based Systems. In: Morrison, R., Oquendo, F. (eds.) EWSA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3527, pp. 1–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jin, J., Nahrstedt, K.: QoS Specification Languages for Distributed Multimedia Applications: A Survey and Taxonomy. IEEE Multimedia Magazine 11(3), 74–87 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Xiaohui, G., Nahrstedet, K., Yuan, W., Wichadakul, D.: An XML-based Quality of Service Enabling Language for the Web. Journal of Visual Language and Computing, Special issue on Multimedia Languages for the Web 13(1) (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aagedal, J.: Quality of service support in development of distributed systems. Ph.D. thesis, University of Oslo (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wichadal, D., Nahrstedt, K., Gu, X., Xu, D.: 2KQ + : An Integrated Approach of QoS Compilation and Reconfigurable, Component-Based Run-Time Middleware for the Unified QoS Management Framework. In: Guerraoui, R. (ed.) Middleware 2001. LNCS, vol. 2218, pp. 373–394. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Loyall, J., Bakken, D., Schantz, R., Zinky, J., Karr, D., Vanegas, R., Anderson, K.: QoS Aspect Languages and Their Runtime Integration. In: O’Hallaron, D.R. (ed.) LCR 1998. LNCS, vol. 1511, pp. 303–318. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Amundsen, S., Lund, K., Griwodz, C., Halvorsen, P.: Scenario Description –Video Streaming in the Mobile Domain, Technical report (2005),
  18. 18.
    Capra, L., Emmerich, W., Mascolo, C.: CARISMA: Context-Aware Reflective middleware System for Mobile Applications. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 29(10), 929–945 (2003)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Garland, D., Cheng, S.-W., Huang, A.-C., Schmerl, B., Steenkiste, P.: Rainbow: Architecture-Based Self-Adaptation with Reusable Infrastructure. IEEE Computer 37(10), 46–54 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sten A. Lundesgaard
    • 1
  • Ketil Lund
    • 1
  • Frank Eliassen
    • 1
  1. 1.Simula Research Laboratory, Network and Distributed SystemsLysakerNorway

Personalised recommendations