Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Speed-R : Semantic Peer to Peer Environment for Diverse Web Services Registries Kaarthik Sivashanmugam Kunal Verma Ranjit Mulye Zhenyu Zhong Final Project.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Speed-R : Semantic Peer to Peer Environment for Diverse Web Services Registries Kaarthik Sivashanmugam Kunal Verma Ranjit Mulye Zhenyu Zhong Final Project."— Presentation transcript:

1 Speed-R : Semantic Peer to Peer Environment for Diverse Web Services Registries Kaarthik Sivashanmugam Kunal Verma Ranjit Mulye Zhenyu Zhong Final Project CSCI 8350: Enterprise Integration

2 Outline  Vision  Why Speed-R ? Goals and Objectives  Layers in Speed-R, Architecture model  Environment and Technology Choices P2P, Peer Roles, Registries Ontology, Domain Ontologies  Peer Interaction Protocols  Present Status  Future Work

3 Goal  Create a more scalable, high performance environment for Web Service Discovery Scalability using P2P High Performance using Semantic Annotation

4 Registry is universal and provides non-semantic search Search retrieves lot of services (irrelevant results included) Which service to select ? How to select? The Problem.. Keyword match, taxonomy

5 Registries are categorized Select relevant registries (semantic filtering) Registry is domain specific and supports semantic search Select service(s) of interest Ontology The Solution..

6 SWAP: Semantic Web and Peer-to-Peer SWWS: Semantic Web and Web Services 3-Dimensions of fully enabled Service driven architectures [Staab and Maedche] I-D: Info Vs. Activity II-D: Centraized Vs Adhoc III-D: Implicit Vs Explicit semantics

7 1.No. of Peers = No. of Service providers 2. No central registry 3. Search may not be efficient 4. Peer community is huge 1.No. of Peers ≠ No. of Service providers 2.Registry at each peer 3.Search is better 4.Peer community is smaller Granularity of de-centralization Sparse: Each service provider is a peer Coarse: Each registry provider is a peer

8 Objectives  Using upper ontology to organize registries enabling logical (semantic) partitioning of all Web services based on domains  avoids replication, improves scalability  Supporting domain specific ontology in each registry  enables use of semantically annotated Web services (utilizes semantic annotation of Web services supported by related project SAWS)  Using P2P based decentralized infrastructure for better interoperability and management of registries  Provides high degree of autonomy and decentralization of registry architecture

9 Motivation (Why Speed-R ?)  Large number of registry/repository implementations are anticipated [NIST report]. how to link all registries ?  Success of business depends on speed, reacheability and locating right partners. Keyword-based search results too many irrelevant results. where to search ? how to search ?  Central problem in e-commerce interoperability is that no common basis for interaction between different business domains/environments how to handle interoperability issues ? Without making assumptions

10 Vision Interoperating Web Services registries. 1 2 1.High level query from user (optional Input/Output/Pre-post conditions/transactions/constraints) 2. List of relevant Web Services (discover) OR Composition plans of web processes Client This project is the first step towards this vision and focuses on building a scalable infrastructure Ontologies

11 Capabilities  Provides logical view of all types of registries Finding right service using full scale ontology support *  Networks all types of Web Service registries Achieving better interoperation without affecting their specifications and autonomy  Semantic Service Publication and Querying Semantic matching of services during discovery * Using Protégé API

12 Layers in Speed-R

13 ……. Peer1 Peer2 Peer3 PeerK PeerN Reg1Reg2Reg3 ….. RegNRegK GWP Peer1..PeerN: Operator Peers Reg1..RegN: Registries GWP:Gateway Peer Each ‘Operator Peer’ manages a registry using Operator Peer Controller Model: Peer as a registry operator Operator Services, Domain Ontology Operator Services, Domain Ontologies Operator Services, Domain Ontology API Registries Ontology

14 Description of the Architecture  Each Peer runs ‘Operator Peer’ to control semantic access to its registry (direct registry access without support for semantic discovery is allowed)  Peers support Domain Ontology and Operator Services (if ontology is not used, no semantic discovery can be provided, search defaults to keyword search)  Each Registry can be accessed using API, which is dependent on its implementation and standard that it conforms to.  Registries Ontology (i.e., the upper ontology, only one for the whole P2P cloud) is present in the P2P n/w. Any given time Peers are aware of the updated Registries Ontology.

15 Why P2P?  Best suited for information sharing with a scalable approach  To logically relate all registries maintaining their autonomy  Decentralization of control  To avoid replication of registry objects  Efficient Querying Forwarding query to relevant registry  Deploying Operator Services effectively

16 Why Gateway Peer? Gateway Peer: Entry point for Operator Peer/registry to join P2P group  Updating Registries Ontology  Maintaining catalogue of all registries  Validity check & Assertions for change in Registries Ontology *  Security measures ( if any ) during registry addition * Could be a single Peer or tightly bound group * of peers * Future work

17 Why Operator Peer? Operator Peer: Member of P2P network and each OP controls a registry  Keeping registries physically outside P2P network (but logically inside P2P)  Optionally force Web service registrations to go thru conformance checking with domain specific ontology used with that registry  Deploying Operator Services

18 Why Registries Ontology?  To capture relationship among registries to use for semantic interoperability  To allow new Registry operators to categorize their registry  To manage different registry types effectively.  To send queries to relevant registry in automated manner * Registry Types [JP2P Unleashed]:  Corporate Registries (Public/Non-public)  CRM/ERP vendor Registries (Package of services)  E-market places (Private/Open)  Consortia Registries (Industry specific/Standards specific)  etc.. * Future work

19 Domain Ontology  A Domain Ontology defines the concepts and relationships in the domain of interest that will be used for semantic annotation of services (by the registry adopting that ontology)  Used by Operator Services. Eg. Semantic Service Publication/Querying  Not a mandatory requirement to join Speed-R

20 Peer Interaction Protocols  Registry addition by an Operator Operator Joins P2P cloud and initiates I-Type 1  Publishing a Web Service with annotation Client joins P2P cloud and initiates I-Type 2  Semantic Querying for a Web Service Client joins P2P cloud and initiates I-Type 3 I-Type: Interaction Type

21 Adding a Registry: I-Type 1 1 2 3 New Registry Operator Gateway Peer 1.REQUEST: for Registries Ontology 2.SEND: Registries Ontology 3.SUBMIT: Change in Registries Ontology 4.Registries Ontology updated at GWP, change is broadcasted 5.New Registry Operator joins P2P cloud and makes its registry available for access

22 Publishing a Web Service: I-Type 2 P2P network of Operator Peers Web Service Provider 1 2 3a 1.REQUEST: for Registries Ontology 2.SEND: Registries Ontology 3.Registry selection using Registries ontology and service publication a)Without annotation (not I-Type 2) b)Using annotation service, Service ontology provided by OP ……. 3b Domain Ontology, services

23 Querying for Web Service: I-Type 3 P2P network of Operator Peers 1 2 3-1 1.REQUEST: for Registries Ontology 2.SEND: Registries Ontology 3-1. Registry selection using registries ontology and querying/browsing the registry (not I-Type 3) OR 3-2a. Registry selection using registries ontology and querying the Operator peer 3-2b. Value added querying by operator peer using querying operator service, Service ontology 4-1, 4-2. Query results Client 3-2a 3-2b 4-1 4-2 ……. Domain Ontology, services

24 Semantic Publication |Querying Map Inputs/Outputs to Concepts in Ontology and Publish in registry Create template, map it with Concepts in Ontology and Search

25 Status Quo  Basic P2P infrastructure is complete JXTA peer network setup Peer Roles implementation Peer interaction protocols  Completed the implementation of adding registries to peer group, WS Publishing and blended querying/browsing $ of Web Services. Ontology (Registries Ontology) based Registry selection for querying GUI to aid WSDL-UDDI mapping GUI to aid Ontology (Domain Ontology) based Service discovery $ With and without semantics

26 Future of Speed-R  Integrating Speed-R with SAWS(MWSDI)  Using SOAP based communication among peers  Security features, performance and reliability issues in P2P network  and finally…support for high level queries for service discovery and process composition

27 Questions/Comments ? Thank you !


Download ppt "Speed-R : Semantic Peer to Peer Environment for Diverse Web Services Registries Kaarthik Sivashanmugam Kunal Verma Ranjit Mulye Zhenyu Zhong Final Project."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google