Publications

Click on one of the links below to jump to the relevant section of this page, or just scroll down if you want to peruse our outputs.

Open Access Preprints

This list may be out of date. Please refer to the arXiv search for all results: SPLab preprints.

  1. Josef Spillner, Transformation of Python Applications into Function-as-a-Service Deployments, May 2017.
  2. Josef Spillner, Snafu: Function-as-a-Service (FaaS) Runtime Design and Implementation, March 2017.
  3. Josef Spillner and Serhii Dorodko, Java Code Analysis and Transformation into AWS Lambda Functions, February 2017.
  4. Josef Spillner, Exploiting the Cloud Control Plane for Fun and Profit, January 2017.

Selected Talks and Public Appearances

  1. Josef Spillner: Technologies and Mindsets: Trends in Cloud-Native Applications (slides), National University of Asunción, Paraguay, August 2017.
  2. Josef Spillner: Cloud & Cyber-Physical Applications (Machines, IoT, Robots) (slides), Itaipu Technology Park, Paraguay, August 2017.
  3. Piyush Harsh: Cyclops 3.0 – Hierarchical billing made simple for future cloud applications, Future Cloud Applications #3, Zurich, July 2017.
  4. Josef Spillner: Serverless Applications: Tools, Languages, Providers and (Research) Challenges (slides), Serverless Zürich, June 2017.
  5. Seán Murphy: The edge is nigh, 6th Open Cloud Day, Bern, June 2017.
  6. Josef Spillner: Rapid prototyping of cloud applications with open source tools (a research perspective) (slides), 6th Open Cloud Day, Bern, June 2017.
  7. Josef Spillner: Function-as-a-Service: A Pythonic perspective on Serverless Computing (slides) (transcript), PyParis, June 2017.
  8. Bruno Grazioli: Deploying applications to Heterogeneous Hardware using Rancher and Docker (slides), 14th Docker Switzerland User Group Meetup, May 2017.
  9. Manuel Ramírez López: Predictable elasticity of Docker applications (slides), 14th Docker Switzerland User Group Meetup, May 2017.
  10. Josef Spillner: More on FaaS: The Swiss Army Knife of Serverless Computing (slides), Future Cloud Applications #2, April 2017.
  11. Josef Spillner: Containerising Functions using Docker and OpenShift (slides), Microservices Zürich, April 2017.
  12. Josef Spillner, Cloud Applications: Less Guessing, more Planning and Knowing (slides), University of Coimbra, May 2016.
  13. Thomas M. Bohnert, Mobile Cloud Networking: Hurtle, Cyclops, Gatekeeper (slides), 6th FOKUS FUSECO Forum, Berlin, November 5th-6th 2015.
  14. Josef Spillner, The Next Service Wave: Prototyping Cloud-Native and Stealthy Applications (slides), IBM Research Zurich, September 9th 2015.
  15. Michael Erne, Developing Heat Plugins (slides), 11th Swiss OpenStack User Group Meetup, Zurich, September 8th 2015.
  16. Andy Edmonds, Thomas Michael Bohnert & Giovanni Toffetti, “MCN: Beyond NFV”, 7th Cloud Control Workshop, Nässlingen, June 10th 2015.
  17. P Harsh & S Patanjali, CYCLOPS : Rating, Charging & Billing framework (slides), OpenStack Central & Eastern Europe Day 2015, Budapest, Hungary, June 08th 2015
  18. Vincenzo Pii, Building a cloud storage appliance on ZFS (slides), 10th OpenStack Swiss User Group Meetup, Bern, Switzerland, June 4th 2015
  19. G. Toffetti, MITOSIS: distributed autonomic management of service compositions, (slides) ACROSS COST meeting, Apr. 2015
  20. G. Toffetti, Mobile Cloud Networking (MCN): Motivation, Vision, and
    Challenges, (slides), 1st ACROSS Open Workshop on Autonomous Control for the Internet of Services, Apr. 2015
  21. M. Bloechlinger, Migrating an Application into the Cloud with Docker and CoreOS (slides), 3rd Docker Swiss User Group Meetup, Zurich, Switzerland, March 24th 2015
  22. S. Brunner, Cloud-Native Application Design (slides), 10th KuVS Expert Talks NGSDP, Frauenhofer FOKUS Berlin , Mar. 16 2015
  23. S. Murphy, Making OpenStack more Energy Efficient (slides), 9th OpenStack Swiss User Group Meetup, Zurich, Switzerland, March 5th 2015
  24. K. Benz, Monitoring Openstack – The Relationship Between Nagios and Ceilometer, Nagios World Conference, St. Paul MN USA, Oct 13-16 2014
  25. S.Patanjali, Update on CYCLOPS – Dynamic Rating, Charging & billing, OpenStack User Group (slides), October 2014, Winterthur, Switzerland
  26. A. Edmonds, “Cloud Standards & Mobile Cloud Networking”. 2nd MCN Developer Meeting, Torino, Italy. October 1st 2014.
  27. F. Dudouet, A case for CDN-as-a-Service in the Cloud – A Mobile Cloud Networking Argument (slides), ICACCI-2014, Delhi, India, Sep 2014
  28. V. Pii, Ceph vs Swift: Performance Evaluation on a Small Cluster (slides), GÉANT eduPERT Monthly Call, 24 Jul 2014
  29. P. Harsh, A Highly Available Generic Billing Architecture for Heterogeneous Mobile Cloud Services (slides), 2014 World Congress in Computer Science, July 2014, Las Vegas, USA
  30. F. Dudouet, Docker Containers Orchestration: Fig and OpenStack (slides), Docker Swiss User Group , July 2014, Bern, Switzerland
  31. Ph. Aeschlimann, Thomas Michael Bohnert, How to program the SDN – SDK4SDN in the T-NOVA project, Special Session at EUCNC, June 2014
  32. A. Edmonds, T.M. Bohnert, “End-to-End Cloudification of Mobile Telecoms“, 4th Workshop on Mobile Cloud Networking 2014, Lisbon, Portugal.
  33. P. Harsh, “Cyclops – A charging platform for OpenStack Clouds“, Swiss Open Cloud Day, June 2014, Bern, Switzerland.
  34. Ph. Aeschlimann, S. Brunner, KIARA Transport Stack Functionality (slides), ZHAW InIT Meeting, Mai 2014
  35. B.Grazioli, OpenStack an Overview (slides), ZHAW InIT, Mai 2014
  36. S.Brunner, KIARA InfiniBand Demo (slides), ICCLAB Colloqium, April 2014
  37. Ph. Aeschlimann, T.M. Bohnert, The role of SDN and NFV in Mobile Cloud Networking, First Software-Defined Networking (SDN) Concertation Workshop, January 2014, Brussels, Belgium
  38. Ph. Aeschlimann, T.M. Bohnert, QoS in OpenStack with SDN, first meeting of the SDN Group Switzerland, October 2013, Zürich, Switzerland
  39. T.M. Bohnert, Ph. Aeschlimann, Software Defined Networking in the Cloud (slides), Distributed Management Task Force, SVM2013, October 2013, Zürich, Switzerland
  40. Ph.Aeschlimann, “Introduction to Webprogramming“, course Matura2Engineer at ZHAW, October 2013.
  41. P. Harsh, J. Kennedy, A. Edmonds, T. Metsch, “Interoperability and APIs in OpenStack” (slides), EGI Technical Forum and Cloud Interoperability Plugfest, Sep 2013, Madrid, Spain
  42. T. M. Bohnert, A. Edmonds, C. Marti, “Notes on the Future Internet” (slides), 4th EuropeanFuture Internet Summit, Jun 2013, Aveiro, Portugal
  43. T. M. Bohnert, A. Edmonds, P. Aeschlimann, C. Marti, T. Zehnder, L. Graf, “Cloud Computing and the Future Internet” (slides), IEEE VTC Spring, May 2013, Dresden
  44. K. Benz, T. M. Bohnert,”OpenStack HA technologies: a framework to test HA architectures” (slides), The Conference on Future Internet Communications, May 15-16 2013, Coimbra, Portugal
  45. A. Edmonds, “OCCI & Interoperability” (slides), Future Internet Assembly, Dublin, Ireland, May 2013.
  46. A. Edmonds, T. M. Bohnert, C. Marti, “Cloud Experiences: Past, Present and Future of the ICCLab“, Academic Compute Cloud Experience Workshop, Zurich, April 2013.
  47. T. M. Bohnert, A. Edmonds, C. Marti, T. Zehnder, L. Graf, “OpenStack Technology and Ecosystem” (slides),DatacenterDynamics Converged, Apr 2013, Zurich.
  48. T. M. Bohnert, “tbd”, Second National Conference on Cloud Computing and Commerce, Apr 2013, Dublin.
  49. A. Edmonds. T.M. Bohnert, C. Marti, “Open Standards in the Cloud” (slides), Second National Conference on Cloud Computing and Commerce, Apr 2013, Dublin, Ireland.
  50. T. M. Bohnert and C. Marti, “Platform as a Service: The Future of Software Development” (slides), Innovative Software Networking Conference 2013, Feb 2013, Winterthur.
  51. L. Graf, T. Zehnder, “OpenStack Ceilometer”, Presentation at 2nd Swiss OpenStack User Group Meeting February 2013, Zurich.
  52. T. M. Bohnert, T. Taleb, “Towards Mobile Cloud Networking” (slides), Keynote at ONIT Workshop co-located with IEEE GLOBECOM 2012, Anaheim, USA, December 2012.
  53. T. Taleb, T. M. Bohnert, “Cross Roads: Cloud Computing and Mobile Networking” 1st Int workshop on Management and Security technologies for Cloud Computing 2012 (ManSec-CC 2012), IEEE Globecom 2012, Anaheim, USA, 7 Dec. 2012.
  54. T. M. Bohnert, “How to run a large-scale collaborative research project” (slides), MobileCloud Networking Project Kick-off Meeting 2012.
  55. T. Metsch, A. Edmonds, “OCCI & CAMP”, Presentation to OASIS CAMP January 2013.
  56. Ph. Aeschlimann, “SDN – OpenFlow”, Guest lecture at ZHAW for the IT-MAS students December 2012, Zurich.
  57. F. Manhart, “ICCLab”, Presentation at 1st Swiss OpenStack User Group Meeting November 2012, Zurich.
  58. Ph. Aeschlimann, “OpenStack – Quantum – Floodlight”, Presentation at 1st Swiss OpenStack User Group Meeting 2012, Zurich.
  59. A. Edmonds, F. Manhart, Thomas Michael Bohnert, Christof Marti, “From Bare Metal to Cloud”, Presentation at SwiNG SDCD 2012, Bern.
  60. Thomas M. Bohnert, “The OpenStack Cloud Computing OSS Framework” (slides), Puzzle ITC TechTalk 2012, Bern, October 2012.
  61. A. Edmonds, “Open Cloud Standards” (slides), Intel European Research and Innovation Conference, Barcelona, October 2012.
  62. T. M. Bohnert, “Dependability in the World of Clouds” (slides), Intel European Research and Innovation Conference, Barcelona, October 2012.
  63. A. Edmonds, “OCCI Honesty” Presentation, Open World Forum 2012 & Cloudcamp Paris, October 2012.
  64. T. M. Bohnert, “Software-Defined Networking in Cloud Computing Data Centers”, ITU Telecom World 2012, Dubai, October 2012.
  65. T. M. Bohnert, “The ICCLab and FI-PPP Opportunities in Phase Two and FI-WARE” (slides)“, ICTProposer’s Day, Warsaw, September 2012.
  66. A. Edmonds, P. Kasprzak , “From Bare Metal to Cloud” Presentation (video) to EGI Technical Forum 2012, Prague.
  67. T. M. Bohnert, “The FI-PPP after One Year: Lessons Learned, Challenges and Opportunities Ahead” (slides)“, 3rd European Future Internet Summit, Helsinki, June 2012.
  68. T. M. Bohnert, A. Edmonds, C. Marti, F. Manhart, “The OpenStack Cloud Computing Framework and Eco-System” (slides)“, CH-Open “Open Cloud and Public Administration”, June 2011.
  69. T. M. Bohnert,  “Vision and Status towards the Future Internet Technology Foundation” (slides)“, Net!Works General Assembly 2011, Munich, Germany, Nov 2011.
  70. A. Edmonds, “Open Cloud Computing Interface” Presentation (audio) to ISO SC38 at DMTF APTS, Boulder Colorado, 2011.

Books and Book Chapters

  1. A. Luntovskyy and J. Spillner, “Architectural Transformations in Network Services and Distributed Systems“, Springer Vieweg, 2017. ISBN 978-3-658-14840-9.
  2. “Cloud Standards”, A. Edmonds, et. al., San Murugesan (Editor), Irena Bojanova (Editor), “Encyclopedia on Cloud Computing”, Wiley, May 2015

Journals and Magazines

  1. G. Toffetti, S. Brunner, M. Blöchlinger, J. Spillner, T. M. Bohnert: Self-managing cloud-native applications: design, implementation and experience. FGCS special issue on Cloud Incident Management, volume 72, July 2017, pages 165-179, online September 2016.
  2. B. Sousa, L. Cordeiro, P. Simoes, A. Edmonds, et. al., “Towards a Fully Cloudified Mobile Network Infrastructure,” IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management Sept. 2016.
  3. K. Benz, T. M. Bohnert, “Elastic Scaling of Cloud Application Performance Based on Western Electric Rules by Injection of Aspect-oriented Code”. In: Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 61, p.198-205, Elsevier, Nov 2015.
  4. T.M.Bohnert, Ph. Aeschlimann, “Software-defined Networking das verzögerte Paradigma”, Netzwoche Nr. 7922, October 2013
  5. A Jamakovic, T. M. Bohnert, G. Karagiannis, “Mobile Cloud Networking: Mobile Network, Compute, and Storage as One Service On-Demand”, Future Internet Assembly 2013: 356-358, May 2013
  6. Edmonds, A., Metsch, T., Papaspyrou, A., and Richardson, A., “Toward an Open Cloud Standard.” IEEE Internet Computing 16, 4 (July 2012), 15–25.
  7. A. Cimmino, P. Harsh, T. Pecorella, R. Fantacci, F. Granelli, Talha Faizur Rahman, C. Sacchi, C. Carlini – Transactions on emerging telecommunications technologies – Special Issue Article – The role of Small Cell Technology in Future Smart City
  8. A. Edmonds, T. Metsch, and A. Papaspyrou, “Open Cloud Computing Interface in Data Management-related Setups,” Springer Grid and Cloud Database Management, pp. 1–27, Jul. 2011.
  9. A. Edmonds, T. Metsch, E. Luster, “An Open, Interoperable Cloud“, infoq.com, 2011
  10. M. Nolan, J. Kennedy, A. Edmonds, J. Butler, J. McCarthy, M. Stopar, P. Hadalin, Damjan Murn, “SLA-enabled Enterprise IT”, vol. 6994, no. 34. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 319–320.
  11. J. Kennedy, A. Edmonds, V. Bayon, P. Cheevers, K. Lu, M. Stopar, D. Murn, ”SLA-Enabled Infrastructure Management”, Service Level Agreements for Cloud Computing, no. 16. New York, NY: Springer New York, 2011, pp. 271–287.
  12. J. Happe, W. Theilmann, A. Edmonds, K. Kearney, “A Reference Architecture for Multi-level SLA Management”, Service Level Agreements for Cloud Computing, no. 2. New York, NY: Springer New York, 2011, pp. 13–26.
  13. A. Edmonds, T. Metsch, A. Papaspyrou, A. Richardson, “Open Cloud Computing Interface: Open Community Leading Cloud Standards”, ERCIM News No. 83, Special Theme: Cloud Computing, 2010.
  14. W. Theilmann, J. Happe, C. Kotsokalis, and A. Edmonds, “A Reference Architecture for Multi-Level SLA Management,” Journal of Internet Engineering, 2010.
  15. Y. L. Sun, R. Perrott, T. J. Harmer, C. Cunningham, P. Wright, J. Kennedy, A. Edmonds, V. Bayon, J. Maza, G. Berginc, and P. Hadalin, “Grids and Service-Oriented Architectures for Service Level Agreements,” no. 4, P. Wieder, R. Yahyapour, and W. Ziegler, Eds. Boston, MA: Springer US, 2010, pp. 35–44.
  16. T. M. Bohnert, P. Robinson, M. Devetsikiotis, B. Callaway, G. Michailidis, D. Trossen, Special Issue in Journal of Internet Engineering, “Service-Oriented Infrastructure”, Spring 2010

Conference Publications

  1. To appear: J. Spillner, C. Mateos, D. A. Monge, “FaaSter, Better, Cheaper: The Prospect of Serverless Scientific Computing and HPC”, 4th Latin American Conference on High Performance Computing (CARLA), Buenos Aires, Argentina, September 2017. (author version; slides; to appear in Springer CCIS)
  2. To appear: J. Spillner, G. Toffetti, M. R. López, “Cloud-Native Databases: An Application Perspective”, 3rd International Workshop on Cloud Adoption and Migration (CloudWays) @ ESOCC, Oslo, Norway, September 2017. (author version; slides; to appear in Springer CCIS)
  3. A. P. Vumo, J. Spillner, S. Köpsell, “Analysis of Mozambican Websites: How do they protect their users?”, 16th International Information Security South Africa Conference (ISSA), Johannesburg, South Africa, August 2017.
  4. M. Skoviera, P. Harsh, O. Serhiienko, M. Perez Belmonte, T. B. Bohnert, “Monetization of Infrastructures and Services”, European Conference on Networks and Communications (EuCNC), Oulu, Finland, June 2017.
  5. A. Edmonds, G. Carella, F. Z. Yousaf, C. Gonçalves, T. M. Bohnert, T. Metsch, P. Bellavista, L. Foschini, “An OCCI-compliant Framework for Fine-grained Resource-aware Management in Mobile Cloud Networking,” 20th IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communication (ISCC) 2016.
  6. E. Cau, M. Corici, P. Bellavista, L. Foschini, G. Carella, A. Edmonds, T. M. Bohnert, “Efficient Exploitation of Mobile Edge Computing for Virtualized 5G in EPC Architectures,” 4th IEEE International Conference on Mobile Cloud Computing, Services, and Engineering (MobileCloud) 2016
  7. G. Carella, A. Edmonds, F. Dudouet, M. Corici, B. Sousa, Z. Yousaf, “Mobile cloud networking: From cloud, through NFV and beyond,” 2015 IEEE Conference on Network Function Virtualization and Software-Defined Networks (NFV-SDN).
  8. J. Spillner, M. Beck, A. Schill, T. M. Bohnert, “Stealth Databases: Ensuring User-Controlled Queries in Untrusted Cloud Environments”, 8th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Utility and Cloud Computing (UCC), Limassol, Cyprus, December 2015. (slides; author version; IEEExplore/ACM DL)
  9. S. Brunner, M. Blöchlinger, G. Toffetti, J. Spillner, T. M. Bohnert, “Experimental Evaluation of the Cloud-Native Application Design”, 4th International Workshop on Clouds and (eScience) Application Management (CloudAM), Limassol, Cyprus, December 2015. (slides; author version; IEEExplore/ACM DL)
  10. K. Benz, T. M. Bohnert, “Elastic Scaling of Cloud Application Performance Based on Western Electric Rules by Injection of Aspect-oriented Code”, 5th Conference on Complex Adaptive Systems, San Jose CA, USA, November 2015.
  11. S. Patanjali, B. Truninger, P. Harsh, T. Bohnert, “Cyclops: Rating, Charging & Billing framework for cloud”, The 13th international conference on Telecommunications, Graz, Austria, 2015
  12. P. Harsh, and T. Bohnert, “DISCO: Unified Provisioning of Distributed Computing Platforms in the Cloud”, in proceedings of 21st International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Processing Techniques and Applications, Las Vegas, USA, July 2015
  13. B. Meszaros, P. Harsh, and T. Bohnert, “Lightning Sparks all around: A comprehensive analysis of popular distributed computing frameworks”, International Conference on Advances in Big Data Analytics (ABDA’15), Las Vegas, USA, July 2015
  14. Florian Dudouet, Andy Edmonds and Michael Erne, “Reliable Cloud-Applications: an Implementation through Service Orchestration”, International Workshop on Automated Incident Management in Cloud (AIMC’15), Bordeaux, France, April 2015
  15. Giovanni Toffetti Carughi, Sandro Brunner, Martin Blochinger, Florian Dudouet and Andrew Edmonds, “An architecture for self-managing microservices”, International Workshop on Automated Incident Management in Cloud (AIMC’15), Bordeaux, France, April 2015
  16. S. Murphy, V. Cima, T.M. Bohnert, B. Grazioli, “Adding Energy Efficiency to OpenStack”, The 4th IFIP Conference on Sustainable Internet and ICT for Sustainability, Madrid, Spain, April 2015
  17. G. Landi, P.M. Neves,  A. Edmonds,  T. Metsch,  J. Mueller,  P. S. Crosta, “SLA management and service composition of virtualized applications in mobile networking environments.”, IEEE Network Operations and Management Symposium (NOMS), 2014
  18. V.I. Munteanu, A. Edmonds, T.M. Bohnert, T-F. Fortis, “Cloud Incident Management, Challenges, Research Direction and Architectural Approach”, 2014 IEEE/ACM 7th International Conference on Utility and Cloud Computing, London, UK, Dec 2014
  19. F. Dudouet, P. Harsh, S. Ruiz, A. Gomes, T.M. Bohnert, “A case for CDN-as-a-Service in the Cloud – A Mobile Cloud Networking Argument”, ICACCI-2014, Delhi, India, Sep 2014
  20. P. Harsh, K. Benz, I. Trajkovska, A. Edmonds, P. Comi, T. Bohnert, “A highly available generic billing architecture for heterogenous mobile cloud services”, The 2014 World Congress in Computer Science, Computer Engineering, and Applied Computing, Las Vegas, USA.
  21. K. Benz, T. M. Bohnert, “Impact of Pacemaker failover configuration on mean time to recovery for small cloud clusters”, 2014 7th IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing, Alaska, USA.
  22. S. Ibrahim, D. Moise, H. Chihoub, A. Carpen, G. Antoniu, L. Bouge, “Towards Efficient Power Management in MapReduce: Investigation of CPU-Frequencies Scaling on Power Efficiency in Hadoop”, The ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC’14), Workshop on Adaptive Resource Management and Scheduling for Cloud Computing, Paris, France.
  23. I. Trajkovska, Ph. Aeschlimann, C. Marti, T.M. Bohnert, J. Salvachua “SDN enabled QoS Provision for Online Streaming Services in Residential ISP Networks“, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics – Taiwan
  24. I. Anghel, M. Bertoncini, T. Cioara, M. Cupelli, V. Georgiadou, P. Jahangiri, A. Monti, S. Murphy, A. Schoofs, and T. Velivassaki. “GEYSER: Enabling Green Data Centres in Smart Cities”. To appear in proceedings of 3rd International Workshop on Energy-Efficient Data Centres, June 2014
  25. P. Kunszt, S. Maffioletti, D. Flanders, M. Eurich, T.M. Bohnert, A. Edmonds, H. Stockinger, S. Haug, A. Jamakovic-Kapic, P. Flury, S. Leinen and E. Schiller, “Towards a Swiss National Research Infrastructure”, FedICI 2013, Aachen, Germany.
  26. A. Edmonds, T. Metsch, D. Petcu, E. Elmroth, J. Marshall, P. Ganchosov, “FluidCloud: An Open Framework for Relocation of Cloud Services“, USENIX HotCloud ’13, San Jose, CA, US.
  27. K. Benz, T. M. Bohnert, “Dependability Modeling Framework: A test procedure for High Availability in Cloud Operating Systems”, 2013 IEEE 78th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Fall), Las Vegas, USA.
  28. D. Stroppa, A. Edmonds, T. M. Bohnert, “Reliability and Perfomance for OpenStack through SmartOS”, 8th Kommunikation und Verteilte Systeme Fachgespräch (Communication and Distributed Systems Workshop), Königswinter, April 2013 (slides)
  29. E. Escalona, S. Peng, R. Nejabati, D. Simeonidou, J. A. Garcia-Espin, J. Ferrer, S. Figuerola, G. Landi, N. Ciulli, J. Jimenez, B. Belter, Y. Demchenko, C. Laat, X. Chen, A. Yukan, S. Soudan, P. Vicat-Blanc, J. Buysse, M. Leenheer, C. Develder, A. Tzanakaki, P. Robinson, M. Brogle, T. M. Bohnert, “GEYSERS: A Novel Architecture for Virtualization and Co-Provisioning of Dynamic Optical Networks and IT Services”, Future Networks and Mobile Summit 2011, Warsaw, Poland, Jun 2011
  30. T. M. Bohnert, N. Ciulli, S. Figuerola, P. Vicat-Blanc Primet, D. Simeonidou, “Optical Networking for Cloud Computing”, IEEE OFC 2011, Los Angeles, USA, Mar 2011

Standard Specifications

  1. T. Metsch, A. Edmonds, R. Nyrén, and A. Papaspyrou, “Open Cloud Computing Interface – Core,” ogf.org, 2011.
  2. A. Edmonds and T. Metsch, “Open Cloud Computing Interface – Infrastructure,” ogf.org, 2011.
  3. T. Metsch and A. Edmonds, “Open Cloud Computing Interface – RESTful HTTP Rendering,” ogf.org, 2011.

 Theses, Student Papers

  1. S. Patanjali, “Cyclops: Dynamic Rating, Charging & Billing for Cloud”, MSc, ICCLab, Dec 2015
  2. K. Benz, “VM Reliability Tester”, MSc, ICCLab, Jun 2015
  3. K. Benz, “Nagios OpenStack Data Collector & Integration Tool”, MSc, ICCLab, Mar 2015
  4. B. Grazioli, “Data Analysis of Energy Consumption in an Experimental OpenStack System”, BSc, ICCLab, Feb 2015
  5. K. Benz, “An ITIL-compliant Reliability Architecture and Tool Set for OpenStack Cloud Deployments”, Nov 2014
  6. K. Benz, “Evaluation of Maturity, Risks and Opportunities in the Implementation of a High Availability Architecture for an OpenStack Cloud Federation Node”, Sep 2014
  7. S. Brunner, “Konzept zur Migration von Applikationen in die Cloud”, BSc, ICCLab, Jun 2014
  8. J. Borutta, U. Wermelskirchen, “Einsatz von kommerziellen Mobilgeräten und Wireless-Kommunikation im militärischen Umfeld”, July 2014
  9. R. Bäriswyl, “Distributed Crawling”, BSc, Nov 2013
  10. P. Aeschlimann, “OpenFlow for KIARA (FI-WARE), the future Middleware”, BSc, ICCLab, Aug 2013
  11. L. Graf, T. Zehnder, „Monitoring für Cloud Computing Infrastruktur“, BSc, ICCLab, Jun 2013
  12. L. Graf, T. Zehnder, „Monitoring für Cloud Computing Infrastruktur”, PA, ICCLab, Jan 2013
  13. F. Manhart, “Cloud Computing”, MSE Tech Scouting, 2012.

Lab Reports

  1. Service Prototyping Lab Report – 2016 (Y1). August 31, 2016. (pdf)
  2. Service Prototyping Lab Report – 2017 (Y2). September 7, 2017. (pdf)

ICCLab visiting MIT SENSEable City Lab

During his travel in USA, in Jun 2014, the researcher Antonio Cimmino (Zurich University of Applied Science, ICCLab) had the opportunity to visit the MIT SENSEable City Lab, in Cambridge Massachusetts USA, invited by the Director Dr. Carlo Ratti.

The SENSEable City Lab is radically transforming the way the cities are described and understood; alongside the tools they use to design them and impact on their physical structure. Studying these changes from a critical point of view and anticipating them is the goal of the SENSEable City Laboratory, a new strong research initiative at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

InIT Cloud Computing Lab (ICCLab), is deeply involved in the Future Internet Public Partnership Programme (FI-PPP) of the European Commission which includes in its objectives enabling infrastructures for the internet and use cases for smart city sectors.

It is therefore envisaged that in future the initiatives of the two Laboratories, might have some common activities and collaborations at same international events.

Many thanks to the staff of Carlo.

mit 2 mit out mit3 mit4 fiwarefippp

mit projects

 

Cloud and hybrid cloud use cases in large enterprises

Introduction

Many large enterprise applications rely heavily on the underlying information stored in databases. Most of these are used every day via the web browser by hundreds of users, or run calculations in a batch mode. These actions are database intensive. As long as each resource is on premise, communication speed to those databases is mostly not an issue because data center internal network latency and bandwidth is good enough.

Modern cloud offerings allow a new flexibility for companies to plan and scale their datacenters. The data- and compute services do not need to remain in the on premise datacenter, but can be spread in an internal private cloud or externally among one or many public cloud providers. This new concept challenges the traditional IT environment and provides an unprecedented flexibility that pushes traditional data and compute services to their limit.

The hybrid cloud concept involves the usage of internal resources as well as cloud-based resources in case of bursting, which happens when internal resources are overloaded. We conducted a study of the feasibility of using public cloud resources in different use cases for large enterprises, especially in cases where the application computing core has to remain on premises (for security reasons typically) and the database is moved to the cloud.

Test setup from cloud provider to cloud provider

Test setup from cloud provider to cloud provider

Use Case

One reason to go to a public cloud is to lower operational effort. This can be done by letting the cloud provider operate the infrastructure. The enterprise just uses it as a service and take advantage of the cloud providers’ economics of scale. This would be mainly feasible for non-production applications, where performance and data security are not the main focus.

For short tests and new setups of small applications, the cloud can help to keep CAPEX low, as no hardware needs to be acquired. This saves money when resources are only needed for short time periods.

Benchmarking methodology

For performing benchmark tests on different set ups a simple java web application was created. This application wraps the TPC-C implementation of the OLTP-Benchmark and the Apache JMeter application. The tests executed were the TPC-C standard industry benchmark tests for database and custom tests with JMeter against a database structure found in one of SwissRe’s applications and running the most usual queries made by this application. The TPC-C test simulates the OLTP workload of an artificial wholesale supplier company. The test consists of five types of transactions: New order, Payment, Order-status, delivery and stock-level transaction. The most important type is the new order, which enters a complete order in a single database transaction. It was designed to simulate the variable workload found in productive OLTP environments.

Results

Tests done in an enterprise environment showed that the internal database performance is still largely better than databases in the best known public cloud providers when the computing remains local. Going through the internet to issue DB requests simply affects the requests’ throughput by multiple order of magnitude and renders the usage of cloud databases impractical when the computing resources are not located on the same Cloud.

TPC-C Throughput comparison between local Oracle instance and remote MySQL at cloud providers with the application core on premises

TPC-C Throughput comparison between local Oracle instance and remote MySQL at cloud providers with the application core on premises

As most large enterprises already have a sophisticated database and application server infrastructure, changing to a public cloud offering can be challenging and expensive.

Using the given hardware and adding an IaaS and possibly PaaS layer would provide the flexibility of a cloud with no drastic performance impact. The existing database offering – which is often Oracle or DB2 – could be extended with a cheap MySQL alternative. Nonetheless a high performance offering close to the application improves the overall performance of heavy database relying applications drastically.

Cloud possibilities for large enterprises

Some cloud providers allow a billing concept where a customer only pays for the hour when an actual request is made. This allows running applications in the public cloud that are not very database intensive and not often used (as an example a Ski Event Registration Application). Through this model no internal hardware is required and the costs of the application infrastructure can be kept low.

In a hybrid cloud setup, development instances could also easily be deployed to a public cloud. The productive instance could be run in the private high-performance cloud.

For short bursts in the private cloud environment, it is currently not very reasonable to add additional compute power from an external provider when the working data is in the on premise environment, as the performance impact of the latency and throughput is huge.

Advanced Queries to Ceilometer with a mongo backend

We are changing our ceilometer backend from mysql to mongodb in one of our experimental Openstack installations. The reason for this change is that mongo seems to deliver better ceilometer performance than mysql; further ceilometer data structures are a more natural fit with mongo (and indeed, this is largely where they came from). This can be seen in a typical record below which is clearly hierarchical and contains so-called embedded documents (in mongo terminology):

"_id" : ObjectId("53bbe7ea926fc4597b42aafc"),
"counter_name" : "instance",
"resource_metadata" : {
    "status" : "active",
    "display_name" : "Test",
    "name" : "instance-00000001",
    "image" : {
        "id" : "bdfaab74-6542-4cbb-94f1-5306662208a7",
        "name" : "cirros-0.3.2-x86_64-uec"
    },
    "host" : "7c261f3a33c099538d448be797e5ce0c0d8cf8bf9f75dd59ce04df86",
}
...

Mongo natively provides support for queries of data structured in this fashion. More specifically, mongo enables data at different levels of the hierarchy to be queried – something which is difficult in SQL.

In python, this can be done simply as follows:


query = [{'field': 'timestamp', 'op': 'gt', 'value': date},
{'field': 'metadata.status', 'op': 'eq', 'value': 'active'}]

sample_list = ceilometer.samples.list(meter_name='instance', q=query)

The interesting point, which we did not understand clearly until now, is that ceilometer with a mongo backend supports exactly this type of query. Thus, the following command line query can obtain all instances that were active for a certain period of time:


ceilometer sample-list -m instance -q “timestamp>date; metadata.status=’active’” 

Then ceilometer will return all the samples of instances active in this time range.

+--------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+--------------------+
| Resource ID                          | Name      | Type     | Timestamp           |
+--------------------------------------------------+----------+---------------------+
| 7535b9f6-01a6-410e-980d-338031e7a2c4 | instance  | instance | 2014-07-09T09:30:05 |
| 7535b9f6-01a6-410e-980d-338031e7a2c4 | instance  | instance | 2014-07-09T09:20:05 |
| 7535b9f6-01a6-410e-980d-338031e7a2c4 | instance  | instance | 2014-07-09T09:10:04 |
+--------------------------------------+-----------+----------+---------------------+

Querying ceilometer with a mysql database in this fashion results in an error.

New initiative started: Cloud Incident Management

Ongoing adoption of Cloud Computing has lead to an increase in the level of complexity of the existing services and inherently increasing risks for companies willing to migrate in order to benefit from this new paradigm. Unfortunately, one area that has not been properly engaged is Incident Management.

Cloud Incident Management is a new research direction which focuses on conducting forensic investigations, electronic discovery (eDiscovery), and other critical aspects of security that are inherent in a multi-tenant, highly virtualized environment, along with any standards that need to be followed.

An Incident is an event which occurs outside the standard operation plan and which can lead to a reduction or interruption of quality of service. Incidents, in Cloud Computing, can lead to service shortages at all infrastructure levels (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS).

Incident Management provides a solid approach to address SLA incidents by covering aspects pertaining to service runtime in cloud through monitoring and analysis of events that may not cause SLA breaches but may disrupt service execution, or by covering aspects related to security by correlating and analysing information coming from logs and generating adequate corrective responses.

More information soon to come…

Migration of Ceilometer Energy Consumption Data from Havana/MySQL to Icehouse/MongoDB

We are working on upgrading some of our servers from Havana to Icehouse. One of the reasons for doing this is that the performance of Ceilometer on Havana is underwhelming. Part of the move involves moving to a mongodb backend (default in Mirantis Openstack 5.0) but we also want to keep our energy consumption data from our Havana system. Consequently, we have a data migration issue from Havana/mysql to Icehouse/mongo. Here, we describe how we did this migration. (Note that as this is just a small experimental system, we don’t have important user and account data to transfer).

Continue reading

IEEE Cloud – final day and final thoughts

We’ve given some impressions of IEEE Cloud over the last couple of days. The final day definitely had less energy with some no-shows for presentations and the audiences being generally small – getting to/from Alaska is not so easy so I guess some folks are already on their way home.

That said, there were a few interesting talks today. One talk from guys who are just down the road from us was given by Luca Gherandi from ETH on a PaaS platform dedicated to robotics applications called Rapyuta. This came out of an FP7 project and includes capabilities such as computer vision, mapping, motor control etc and addresses the split between capabilities on device and in-cloud. He focused on a particular approach to make it easier to configure.

Another talk by Byung Chul Tak arising from an IBM/facebook collaboration described some work they have done to facilitate easier migration of applications to the cloud. The problem they focus on relates to basic IP address issues – noting that it’s often problematic to simply change the IP addresses of the hosts that are running a complex application. In their AppCloak system, they make changes to system libraries to intercept any network calls and substitute the new (cloud) IP address with the old IP address. A nice trick, but it does look like an ugly patch which of course will lead to an even greater fragmentation in address space and overall complexity if it does see any widespread use.

Another interesting talk involving a Purdue/VMWare collaboration focused on understanding VM requirements in detail through log analysis. Specifically, they wanted to understand memory consumption of an application running in a VM through the rich set of log data generated within VMWare in order to predict how much memory a new instance would require. The managed to identify the most critical parameters which influence this and developed good predictors of memory consumption.

Overall, we were pleasantly surprised with the conference. While the conference was generally too long and surprisingly there seemed to be no social media dialogue around it, there were some interesting folks saying interesting things. From our reporting, it’s obvious that we found some of the industry talks a bit more interesting, but perhaps that’s our bias; also, it probably does not make it clear that the level of industrial engagement was generally not so high with a notable absence of the big players in this space.

Big Data was certainly a prevalent theme throughout the conference, with a lot of the talks and sessions focused on Map Reduce and large data management problems. For a cloud conference, there seemed to be very little talk of SDN and even technologies such as Openstack hardly featured. Generally, there was a strong bias towards the classical world of academic publishing and the science perspective rather than engineering; it was interesting to see that there was a big data hackathon and that they are quite open to the introduction of new types of sessions next year.

Would we go again next year? Alaska is a very long way from home – I’m not sure that it makes so much sense to go so far for a few days of conference attendance, but certainly east coast US could make sense and depending on how it’s organized, it could be an attractive proposition.