Cloud federation - SLAs
Christian Temporale, Hewlett Packard
christian.temporale@hp.com
contrail is co-funded by the EC 7th
Framework Programme under
Grant Agreement nr. 257438
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
1
contrail-project.eu
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SLA concepts review
Contrail SLA syntax
SLA management
SLA terms
Multilevel SLA management
Federation Negotiation
Provider/SLA selection
SLA splitting
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
2
contrail-project.eu
SLA concepts
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
3
contrail-project.eu
SLA – Service Level Agreement
• SLA: agreement (contract) between a Provider and a
Consumer of a service
• A SLA is made of one or more SLOs
• SLO (Service Level Objective): it is a condition on a Term
• Term: measure of a given QoS or QoP attribute
• QoS (Quality of Service) attribute: it describes a specific
measurable aspect of the quality of a service
– Examples: Response time, Throughput
• QoP (Quality of Protection) attribute: it describes a
specific measurable aspect of the security of a service
– Examples: Authentication strength, Reputation, Resource location
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
4
contrail-project.eu
Definitions of SLA
• ITIL (v3), Service Design Book – [A SLA is] an agreement between an IT
Service Provider and a Customer. The SLA describes the IT service,
documents Service Level Targets, and specifies the responsibilities of the IT
Service Provider and the Customer. A single SLA may cover multiple IT
Services or multiple customers.
• WS-Agreement specification - An agreement defines a dynamicallyestablished and dynamically managed relationship between parties. The
object of this relationship is the delivery of a service by one of the parties
within the context of the agreement. The management of this delivery is
achieved by agreeing on the respective roles, rights and obligations of the
parties. The agreement may specify not only functional properties for
identification or creation of the service, but also non-functional properties
of the service such as performance or availability. Entities can dynamically
establish and manage agreements via Web service interfaces.
• Contrail, D3.1 – A SLA is the part of a contract between the provider and
the consumer of some service where the service itself is defined and the
guarantees offered, usually by the provider, are stated.
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
5
contrail-project.eu
SLA structure
• UUIDs: SLA ID and Template ID
• Validity: when the SLA is effective
• Parties: obliged parties: Provider
and Customer
• Interface Declaration:
identification of the Services that
are object of the agreement
• Agreement Terms: Guarantees
offered on the Services, including
business attributes (price and
penalties)
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
6
SLA@SOI SLA
UUIDs
Validity
Parties
Interface Declaration
Variable Declaration
Agreement Terms
contrail-project.eu
A SLA template is…
• Like a pattern…
• …for a SLA
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
7
contrail-project.eu
SLAs and SLA Templates (SLA@SOI)
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
8
Agreement terms (SLA@SOI)
• Description
– Detail
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
9
contrail-project.eu
SLA syntax
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
10
contrail-project.eu
BNF syntax of a simple SLA Template
sla_template {
uuid = example_slat_1 // universally unique identifier for this SLAT
UUID
sla_model_version = sla_at_soi_sla_model_v1.0
party {
Provider
id = ACME
role = provider
party
}
interface_declr {
Interface
id = the_service // the ID used within the SLAT to refer to "TheService“
declarations
provider_ref = ACME
interface_spec { // an "Interface.Specification“
name = TheService
operation{ // an "Interface.Operation“
name = doStuff
}
}
}
Agreement
agreement_term {
terms
id = term_1
guaranteed_state {
id = guaranteed_state_1
qos:completion_time(the_service) < 10s // a "ConstraintExpr“
}
}
}© 2013 HP development company L.P.
11
contrail-project.eu
XML syntax of simple SLA Template 1/2
UUID
Provider
party
Interface
declarations
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
12
contrail-project.eu
XML syntax of simple SLA Template 2/2
Agreement
terms
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
13
contrail-project.eu
SLA management
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
14
contrail-project.eu
SLA Lifecycle
Template
definition
Negotiation
Provisioning
Monitoring /
Enforcement
Expiration
• Templates are defined according to the available
services
• Customer selects a SLA template
• Customer negotiates a SLA using a SLA template
• Provisioning: service execution
• Assessment and corrective actions during execution
• Termination and decommission of the service
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
15
contrail-project.eu
Provider SLAM Architecture
E
x
t
t
e
r
n
a
l
u
s
e
r
initiateNegotiation
negotiate
createAgreement
createCustomer
Provider SLAM
SLA Lifecycle manager & Negotiation
PE
POC
VEP
SLA Enforcement
PAC
SLA Repository
SLAR
createTemplate
getSLA
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
SLATR
Provisioning
manager
violation messages
Monitoring
16
contrail-project.eu
SLA negotiation and provisioning
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
17
contrail-project.eu
SLA enforcement
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
18
contrail-project.eu
OVF (Open Virtualization Format)
• OVF is a standard
format used to
describe multiple
virtual resources,
their properties and
their connections
• Provisioning
services in Contrail
use OVF descriptors
as input
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
19
contrail-project.eu
Combining SLAs with OVF
•
•
•
•
Role of OVF: to describe resources
Role of SLA: to express guarantees on services
SLAs contain both a service description and guarantees about the service
There is a semantic overlap between OVFs and SLAs for IaaS resources
OVF
SLA
Resource details
Virtual Machines
Startup instructions
Validity period
Resources
description
Service guarantees
Price / Penalties
Logical Networks
Virtual Disks
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
Agreement Parties
Scaling rules
20
contrail-project.eu
Combining OVF and SLA
• Need a link between guarantees (SLA) and resources (OVF)
– To enforce SLA terms, resources referenced in the guarantees must be well known
• Need elasticity
– Contrail should support negotiation of long lasting SLAs for provisioning multiple OVFs
– A SLA should be defined independently from the OVFs to be provisioned
• Possible solutions
1. Specific SLAs. They refer to specific appliances / OVF resources
1.
E.g. VM34 will have 8Gb of RAM
2. Generic SLAs. They express guarantees that can be applied to all OVFs /
appliances
1.
E.g. All VMs will have 4Gb of RAM
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
21
contrail-project.eu
Specific SLAs
• Refer to a specific OVF file
• Express guarantees about specific OVF items (e.g. Virtual
Systems or VS Collections)
OVF descriptor
VS Collection
SLA
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
22
contrail-project.eu
Generic SLAs
• Do NOT refer to a specific OVF file
• Express guarantees valid for all OVF appliances
OVF descriptor
VS Collection
SLA
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
23
contrail-project.eu
Specific SLA: reference to an OVF file
<slasoi:InterfaceDeclr>
<slasoi:Text>Interface for overall OVF</slasoi:Text>
<slasoi:Properties>
<slasoi:Entry>
<slasoi:Key>OVF_URL</slasoi:Key>
<slasoi:Value>/opt/contrail/ ovf/lamp.ovf</slasoi:Value>
</slasoi:Entry>
</slasoi:Properties>
<slasoi:ID>OVF-Descriptor-General</slasoi:ID>
<slasoi:ProviderRef>ContrailProvider</slasoi:ProviderRef>
<slasoi:Endpoint>
<slasoi:Text/><slasoi:Properties />
<slasoi:ID>OVF-Endpoint</slasoi:ID>
<slasoi:Location>VEP-ID</slasoi:Location>
<slasoi:Protocol>http://www.slaatsoi.org/slamodel#HTTP</slasoi:Protocol>
</slasoi:Endpoint>
<slasoi:Interface>
Reference type:
<slasoi:InterfaceResourceType>
OVF descriptor
<slasoi:Name>OVFDescriptor</slasoi:Name>
(file)
</slasoi:InterfaceResourceType>
</slasoi:Interface>
</slasoi:InterfaceDeclr>
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
24
contrail-project.eu
Specific SLA: reference to VirtualSystem
<slasoi:InterfaceDeclr>
<slasoi:Text>Interface to specific OVF item</slasoi:Text>
<slasoi:Properties><slasoi:Entry>
<slasoi:Key>OVF_URL</slasoi:Key>
<slasoi:Value>/opt/contrail/ ovf/lamp.ovf</slasoi:Value>
</slasoi:Entry></slasoi:Properties>
<slasoi:ID>OVF-Descriptor-LAMP</slasoi:ID>
VirtualSystem ID
<slasoi:ProviderRef>ContrailProvider</slasoi:ProviderRef>
inside the OVF
<slasoi:Endpoint>
<slasoi:Text/>
<slasoi:Properties><slasoi:Entry>
<slasoi:Key>OVF_VirtualSystem_ID</slasoi:Key>
<slasoi:Value>MyLampService</slasoi:Value>
</slasoi:Entry></slasoi:Properties>
<slasoi:ID>VM-with-Linux-Apache-MySQL-PHP</slasoi:ID>
<slasoi:Location>VEP-ID</slasoi:Location>
<slasoi:Protocol>http://www.slaatsoi.org/slamodel#HTTP</slasoi:Protocol>
</slasoi:Endpoint>
<slasoi:Interface>
<slasoi:InterfaceResourceType>
<slasoi:Name>OVFAppliance</slasoi:Name>
Reference type:
</slasoi:InterfaceResourceType>
OVF appliance
</slasoi:Interface>
</slasoi:InterfaceDeclr>
(VirtualSystem)
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
25
contrail-project.eu
Negotiation model for specific SLA
• Optimization problem: find “nearest” offer that
fulfill user’s request
– Constraints:
• OVF (lower bound): provider can’t offer less than the request
• VM Handler (upper bound): provider can’t offer more than resource available
OVF
Combined resources
SLA
Proposal
Resources available
Small VM
Provider
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
Medium VM
Big VM
26
Map function
Counter Offer
Pricing model
• Logic determining the price of the services in the SLA Offer:
totalPrice = resourcesPrice + guaranteePrice
resourcesPrice= (cpu_speed * cpu_speed_unit_price) +
(vm_cores * vm_core_unit_price) +
(memory
* memory_unit_price)
guaranteesPrice = (resourcesPrice *
guaranteeModificationPricePercentage)
• It’s open and flexible to meet the particulars pricing policies
of different cloud computing providers. It’s possible to
associate a price for each individual resource (CPU, RAM,
HDD, etc.), a specific OVF, or a particular VM configuration.
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
SLA terms
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
28
contrail-project.eu
Classification of SLA Terms
• Term type
– QoS (constraints on performance)
– QoP (level of protection)
• Evolvability
– Static (static properties, e.g. # of VM cores)
– Dynamic (non static props., e.g. RAM)
• Monitorability & Controllability
– Unobservable
– Observable
Observable
Unobservable
Enforceable
• Enforceable
• Categorization in a Quality Model (e.g. S-CUBE)
– Performance, Dependability, Reliability, Network-related, Infrastructure-related,
Security, Auditability, Legal
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
29
contrail-project.eu
Quality Model
new quality terms/categories
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
30
contrail-project.eu
Example QoS/QoP SLA Terms
• QoS
– Availability
• the probability that the cloud infrastructure is running over a predefined
monitoring period (usually a month or a year)
– Virtualization factor
• ratio between virtual and physical CPU cores
• QoP
– Location
• country code where the resource (VM / storage) is located
– Isolation level
• depends on which measures are taken to ensure isolation between
different users hosted on the same infrastructure (e.g. storage
encryption, communication encryption, zero-filling released storage, …)
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
31
contrail-project.eu
SLA Terms supported in Contrail (v1.2)
Term name
Description
Type
Evolv.
Enforc.
vm_cores
number of cores assigned to a VM
QoS
static
Enf.
memory
RAM size assigned to a VM
QoS
dynamic
Enf.
cpu_speed
CPU frequency assigned to a VM
QoS
static
Enf. (*)
cpu_load
average system load over a 5minute period
QoS
dynamic
Enf.
location
country code where the resource
(VM / storage) is located
QoP
dynamic /
static
Obs.
(*) quantized values
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
32
contrail-project.eu
Additional SLA terms in next releases
Term name
Description
Type
Evolv.
Enforc.
reservation
Resources reservation
QoS
static
Enf.
co-location (rack)
Location of VM in the same
cluster/host
QoS
static
Enf.
minimum LoA
Minimum level of authentication
needed to access users’ resources
QoP
static
Enf.
availability
% of uptime of the whole provider
infrastructure
QoS
dynamic
Obs.
vm_cpu_load
[5 min CPU avg load / # of cores]
for the VM of a VirtualSystem
QoS
dynamic
Obs.
host_cpu_load
[5 min CPU avg load / # of cores]
for the host of a VirtualSystem
QoS
dynamic
Enf.
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
33
contrail-project.eu
Additional SLA terms in next releases /2
Term name
Description
Type
Evolv.
Enforc.
location for
storage
replicas for the given volume are
placed in the given countries
QoP
dynamic
Obs.
not-co-location
(host)
VMs are not allocated on the same QoS
cluster/host
static
Enf.
reliability for
storage
number N of replicas for the given
volume
QoS
static
Enf.
bandwidth
Applied to a single network defined QoS
in the OVF
static
Enf.
public IP address
Applied to a single network defined QoS
in the OVF
static
Enf.
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
34
contrail-project.eu
Multilevel SLA management
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
35
contrail-project.eu
SLA Interaction Model
• User negotiates
a SLA with the
Federation
Cloud user
SLAfed
Contrail Federation Layer
• Federation
negotiates SLAs
with one or
more providers,
on behalf of the
user
SLA1
SLAn
Contrail Provider Layer
Contrail Provider Layer
Provider P1
Provider Pn
Contrail Resource Layer
…
Contrail Resource Layer
PaaS1
IaaS1
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
36
PaaSn
IaaSn
contrail-project.eu
Future: integration of external
providers
Cloud user
SLAfed
• External providers
will be integrated
in future versions
of Contrail
• The interaction
model will not
change for the
user
Contrail Federation Layer
SLA1
SLAn
Contrail Provider Layer
Contrail Provider
(Proxy) Layer
Provider P1
Contrail Resource Layer
PaaS1
IaaS1
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
37
…
External Provider Pn
(Amazon, Azure, …)
contrail-project.eu
SLAs in Contrail are the main pillars
for Cloud Federations
• Federation: abstraction of providers
• SLA+OVF is a unified way for expressing
user requirements
• QoS/QoP requested by each customer can be
satisfied irrespective of the provider
• Federation: broker of providers
– Provider selection is based on SLAs
A
Federation
B
Cloud B
• new market and business model for intermediate
players
• Federation: small providers can join
forces
– SLA splitting allows distributing application over
multiple providers
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
38
C
C
A
B
contrail-project.eu
Added value of Contrail approach:
Federation as a Virtualization of Clouds
• Contrail Federations relieve the user from managing cloud
providers
– Inner complexity is hidden to users
– Federated Identity Management
– Best / cheapest cloud provider is automatically selected based on user
preferences
• Comparing SLAs and selecting the best provider opens new
Cloud mediators market
• Automatic SLA negotiation allows Cloud providers to
personalize their offer
• Worldwide Clouds made possible
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
39
contrail-project.eu
Contrail high level architecture
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
40
contrail-project.eu
SLA management in a Cloud Federation
SLA
Federation SLA
Management
Accounting
Application Splitting
Federated Identity
Provisioning
Manager
CSP SLA Mgmt.
VEP
CSP SLA Mgmt.
VEP
CSP SLA Mgmt.
VEP
Cloud Provider
Cloud Provider
Cloud Provider
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
41
contrail-project.eu
Monitoring
Provider Selection
Security
Federation
Multilevel SLA Management Architecture
Federation SLAM
F
e
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Provider SLAM
SLA
Negotiation
SLA
Negotiation
SLA
Repository
SLA
Repository
SLA
Enforcement
SLA
Enforcement
Monitoring
Hub
Monitoring
Manager
Federation
Accounting
Provider
Accounting
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
42
VEP
Provisioning
Manager
contrail-project.eu
General interaction model
Cloud user
Federation
Provider
IaaS / PaaS
Resource
Negotiate
Select / Split SLA
Negotiate
Provision
Provision
Provision
Monitoring events
Adjustment
SLA violation
Enforcement action
Adjustment
Enforcement action
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
43
contrail-project.eu
User access and applications retrieval
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
44
contrail-project.eu
SLA negotiation /1
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
45
contrail-project.eu
SLA negotiation /2
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
46
contrail-project.eu
Selection
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
47
contrail-project.eu
Provider selection
• Happens during user-federation negotiation
• Driven by user-specified preferences
• May be guided also by provider reputation, if the
federation keeps track of it
• Roles:
– The federation component gives the list of providers to be
contacted by the Federation SLAM
• It might even vary for each negotiation round
– The Federation SLAM negotiate the SLA template (proposal) with
each provider and then selects the best SLA offers
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
48
contrail-project.eu
User preferences
–Users drive the provider selection process by
specifying user preferences during the
negotiation
–User preferences include:
• Selection criteria (e.g. minimize price or
maximize quality or even maximize penalties)
• Positive or negative preference on individual
providers (e.g. not on Azure)
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
49
contrail-project.eu
User criteria
• Each criterion is a pair {Guarantee Term, Weight},
weight {0, 1}
• Weight express the importance of the term for that
criterion (max importance = 1).
– By default, the weight is considered 0.
• Currently supported terms:
– cpu_speed
– core_number
– memory
– price
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
50
contrail-project.eu
Provider list and User criteria - Syntax
• The Federation uses the SLA proposal itself to pass User
criteria and Provider list to the Federation SLAM
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
51
contrail-project.eu
Selection process
Normalize
terms
1.
2.
3.
Order SLA
offers
Filter
offers
e.g. value of offer guarantee term / value of proposal guarantee term
User criteria are extracted from SLA Template proposal
Normalized values are weighted using Criteria related weight
–
6.
Apply
evaluation
algorithm
Offer guarantee terms are normalized versus user’s proposal
–
4.
5.
Weight
values
e.g. normalized term value * term weight
An evaluation algorithm is applied to the set of weighted values
SLA offers are ordered according to the output values of the
evaluation algorithm.
SLA offers are filtered
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
52
contrail-project.eu
Evaluation algorithms
• Evaluation algorithms, used to order SLA offers, and so determine the best
one, take into account user criteria weights for impacted terms in each offer
• The problem is transformed in maximizing the Euclidean distance of a point
from the origin, in an n-dimensional space.
• Dimensions can be:
– Terms
– Terms x VirtualSystems
SLA Offer1
Term-1
Term-2
PVS2,O1
SLA Offer2
PVS3,O1
PVS3,O2
PVS1,O1
d
0
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
Term-3
PVS2,O2
PVS1,O2
Term-n
53
contrail-project.eu
Evaluation algorithms
• Different evaluation algorithms have been identified
for ranking the SLA offers
• Based upon user criteria, one can privilege the offer
including the most convenient VirtualSystem, etc.
• The Federation SLA Manager is configurable: the
Federation Administrator can select the preferred
algorithm, or can write their own Java class for it
(implementing a common interface)
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
54
contrail-project.eu
Algorithm example 1: best virtual system /1
• For each VirtualSystem of each SLA offer, the
algorithm computes the Euclidean distance from the
origin of a t-dimensional point, t=NumTerms
cpu_speed
memory
P(W1, W2, W3, W4)
W1
d
core_number
price
0
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
55
dj = distance of j-th
VirtualSystem
Wi = weighted value
of i-th term
contrail-project.eu
Algorithm example 1: best virtual system /2
• The SLA offers are ranked based on their VirtualSystems
distances
• The best SLA Offer is the one including the farther
VirtualSystem from origin
SLA Offer1
Term-1
Term-2
PVS2,O1
SLA Offer2
PVS3,O1
PVS3,O2
PVS1,O1
Term-3
PVS2,O2
PVS1,O2
Term-n
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
56
contrail-project.eu
Algorithm example 2: best mean offer /1
• For each SLA offer, the algorithm computes the Euclidean
distance from the origin of an {t*v}-dimensional point
t=NumTerms, v=NumVirtualSystems
Term1-VS1
Term2-VS2
SLA Offerj
P
Term3-VS3
dj
Term1-VS2
0
Termi-VSk
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
j = {1 .. NumOffers}
Wi k = weighted value
of i-th term for the kth virtualSystem
Term2-VS2
57
contrail-project.eu
Algorithm example 2: best mean offer /2
• The SLA offers are ranked based on their distances
• The best SLA Offer is the farthest one
Term1-VS1
Term2-VS2
SLA Offerj
Term3-VS3
P
dj
0
Term1-VS2
Termi-VSk
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
Term2-VS2
58
contrail-project.eu
Other algorithms
• Select the offer having the best “average”
VirtualSystem
• Select the offer having the best VirtualSystem in
relation to the average of the same VirtualSystem
for the other n-1 offers
• Select the offer having the best average
VirtualSystem in relation to the other offers
•…
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
59
contrail-project.eu
SLA splitting
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
60
contrail-project.eu
Why splitting SLAs?
• The SLA (or application) requires services that cannot be
found on only one provider
– E.g.: the customer wants to distribute its application in several countries
• The amount of resources required goes beyond what a
single provider can offer (and guarantee)
– A service provider does not have to be the size of Amazon to participate in the
Federation
• The required performance cannot be guaranteed by any
single provider alone
– Scaling across multiple providers
• The Federation, according to its own risk management
strategy, wants to distribute the risk of satisfying the user
SLA
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
61
contrail-project.eu
Splitting SLAs
• The Federation splits the user SLA and assigns the
resulting SLAs to multiple providers
• Three types of SLA splitting strategies are considered:
– Service-based SLA splitting
– Resource-based SLA splitting
– Performance-based SLA splitting
• Selection of the best split for a given SLA is a multiobjective optimization problem (total price, QoS offered,
reputation…)
• Some terms cannot be split (invariant terms, typically QoP)
• Not only the SLA, but also the application must be split
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
62
contrail-project.eu
Service-based SLA splitting
• Generation of several
candidate splits, each with
candidate providers
• Selection of the best split
according to total price,
QoS offered, reputation…
Cloud user
SLAfed
ServiceA
ServiceB
ServiceC
Contrail Federation Layer
SLA1
SLA2
ServiceA
ServiceB
ServiceC
Provider P1
Provider P2
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
63
contrail-project.eu
Resource-based SLA splitting
•
•
•
•
Cloud user
SLAfed
100 x
ResourceA
Contrail Federation Layer
SLA1
SLA2
60 x
ResourceA
50 x
ResourceA
Provider P1
Provider P2
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
64
Generation …
Selection …
Penalties cannot be split
Federation, according to
its risk management
strategy, may ask more to
providers to have some
tolerance
contrail-project.eu
Performance-based SLA splitting
•
•
•
•
•
Generation …
Selection …
Penalties…
Tolerance…
Common entry point with
load balancing across
providers
• More complex if Service
not stateless
Cloud user
SLAfed
100
requests/sec
Contrail Federation Layer
SLA1
SLA2
60
requests/sec
50
requests/sec
Provider P1
Provider P2
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
65
contrail-project.eu
SLA splitting steps (without selection)
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
66
contrail-project.eu
SLA splitting with selection
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
67
contrail-project.eu
We Need You!
• Penalties support
– Provider
– Federation (requires a risk
management algorithm)
•
•
•
•
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
68
Support for new SLA terms
New selection algorithms
SLA splitting
Cloud bursting
contrail-project.eu
References
• Contrail web site
– http://contrail-project.eu/
• Public deliverables (SLA-related: D3.1, D3.2, D3.3, and D2.2):
– http://contrail-project.eu/downloads1/-/document_library_display/bM20/view/136157
• Provider SLA Manager online documentation:
– http://contrail.projects.ow2.org/xwiki/bin/view/Documentation/provider-sla
• First version of Provider SLA Manager:
– http://websvn.ow2.org/listing.php?repname=contrail&path=%2Ftrunk%2Fprovider%2Fsla%2F
• Last release packages list (contrail-provider-sla and contrail-provider-tools):
– http://contrail.projects.ow2.org/xwiki/bin/view/Documentation/List+of+Binary+Packages
• Contacts
– lorenzo.blasi@hp.com
– christian.temporale@hp.com
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
69
contrail-project.eu
Thank you!
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
contrail is co-funded by the
http://contrail-project.eu
EC 7th Framework Programme
Funded under: FP7 (Seventh Framework Programme)
Area: Internet of Services, Software & Virtualization (ICT2009.1.2)
Project reference: FP7-IST-257438
Total cost: 11,29 million euro
EU contribution: 8,3 million euro
Execution: From 2010-10-01 till 2013-09-30
Duration: 36 months
Contract type: Collaborative project (generic)
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
71
contrail-project.eu
Backup slides
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
SLA@SOI vs WS-Agreement
WS-Agreement SLA
SLA@SOI SLA
Name
UUIDs
Context
Validity
Terms
Parties
Service Terms
Interface Declrs
Guarantee Terms
Variable Declrs
Agreement Terms
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
73
contrail-project.eu
Contrail current -and future- features
• Multi-level SLA Negotiation
– At Federation level, users negotiate SLAs with the Federation
– At Provider level, the Federation negotiates SLAs with multiple Cloud Providers, on
behalf of end users
– Provider selection: F-SLAM selects best SLA offer according to user criteria
– SLA splitting: SLA may be split among different cloud providers, according to their
specific capabilities
• SLA Enforcement
– At provisioning time, monitoring of allocated resources is started at Provider level
– Support for proactive enforcement
– When SLA is violated, the SLA manager is informed and may take a (corrective)
action.
• Scope of corrective actions depend on the level: resources (provider level) or cloud providers
(federation level)
• Accounting
– The monitoring component records resource consumption information
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
74
contrail-project.eu
SLAs – the Business side…
• A service is a means of delivering value to customers by
facilitating outcomes customers want to achieve without
the ownership of specific costs and risks [ITIL v3
Overview]
• A Service Level Agreement (SLA) between a service
provider and its customers will assure customers that
they can get the service they pay for and will obligate
the service provider to achieve its service promises [Jin]
• Failing to meet SLAs could result in serious financial
consequences for a provider. Hence, service providers
are interested in gaining a good understanding of the
relationship between what they can promise in an SLA
and what their IT infrastructure is capable of delivering
[Jin]
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
75
contrail-project.eu
Examples of SLA QoS terms
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
VM Cores
VM CPU Speed
VM Memory Size
VM Quantity
Appliance availability
Infrastructure availability
VM Disk Throughput
Bandwidth (VM Net Throughput)
Colocation
Database transactions per second
Web application requests per second
MTTF - Mean time to Service Availability Failure
MTTR - Mean time to Recovery from a Service Availability Failure
Database query latency
Key/Value store latency
Map/Reduce makespan
Bag of tasks makespan
Bag of tasks execution cost
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
76
contrail-project.eu
Examples of SLA QoP terms
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Authenticated accesses
Authorized accesses
Isolation from external subjects
Isolation among users
Isolation from Cloud provider
Integrity of users' data
Communication Confidentiality
Communication Integrity
Operation logging
Physical location
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
77
contrail-project.eu
Violation message example
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
78
Pricing tables
© 2013 HP development company L.P.
79