International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 6 number 1 Dec 2013

ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page36

An Effective Cloud Service Reservation Through Negotiation
Praveen.K
1
, Sudhakar.K
2

1
PG Scholar, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Hindusthan College of Engineering and
Technology, Tamilnadu, India
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Hindusthan College of Engineering
and Technology, Tamilnadu, India
ABSTRACT: When making reservations for
Cloud services, the consumer should provide with
price and time slot for the service. The provider
gives the price and time slot which are available,
then the particular service will be provided to the
user by negotiation of both price and time. Since
there is a negotiation on price and time slot, the
requested service may be unavailable. So,
consumers can give multiple proposals for a
service. After the reservation is done the job is
monitored to get the QoS violations. When there is
a malfunction certain actions will be carried out
for the remedy like requesting for resources if
necessary. To get a highest possible QoS assurance
the negotiation uses a trade off algorithm which
makes available of the resources to the services
requested. When the task done by the consumer is
over before the reserved time the QoS cant be
obtained effectively because of the idle state. So the
resource will be given to other consumer to be
utilized which improves the QoS of the Cloud
service reservations.

Keywords: Cloud negotiation, Resource
allocation, Multi-issue negotiation, Negotiation
agent.

1. INTRODUCTION

A cloud computing is a parallel and distributed
system consisting of interconnected and virtualized
computers for resource sharing. When there is a
sharing of resources between consumers and
providers there should be service level agreement
(SLA) between them. The SLA provides service
guarantee that defines time and price slot for the
service. To get a service from the provider the
following should be considered, when to use the
service and price of the service. Since price and
time are considered the Quality of service (QoS) for
the service is not obtained till now. The QoS can be
achieved by monitoring the task of the consumer.
When there is a full utilization of the resource then
the QoS is achieved. To make the full utilization the
task should be monitored and when there is a
resource not utilized then it should be allocated to
some other consumer requesting for that resource. If
there is any user is in need of extra resource then the
additional resource should be provided to attain the
QoS among the service.
When considering the price and time of the
service it is obtained by having negotiation between
the consumer and provider. To provide the service
to the consumer the following algorithms are used
to verify whether the service is available to the user,
the trade off algorithmand the concession making
algorithm. In trade off algorithmthe consumer can
provide with multiple proposals at the time. This
algorithm enhances the negotiation speed and the
aggregated utility. The concession making
algorithm is used to determine amount of
concession in consumers expected total utility. Each
proposal will be given with some concession
without making the consumers total utility to
change. So the consumer can choose from the
available price and time slots given from the
provider.

2. RELATED WORK

There exists lot of approach similar to this approach
which makes use of the price and time slot for the
service to available to the consumer. And there will
be negotiation concept to make resource to be
available to most of the consumers requesting the
service. The price, time and negotiation concepts
make the resource to be available to the consumer
with the requested time and price through
negotiation. Some of these concepts [1] where most
widely used in the grid computing to provide an
efficient service to the consumers.
The trade off algorithm for multi-issue SLA
negotiation [2] is implemented. The trade off
algorithmis applied in the multi issue negotiation
where the each negotiation will be considered with
respect to SLA [3]. The trade off algorithmuses
multiple proposals at the time by which the
consumer can the service by choosing the available
proposal. If the consumer is not satisfied the
proposal will be dropped or given with some
concession. So the service may be accepted or the
proposal will not be given to the consumer.
There is a concurrent negotiation in grid
resource [4] & [5] co allocation. The negotiation
scheme which is used in the grid computing for
allocation of resources is considered. To make a
resource to be available for a consumer there
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 6 number 1 Dec 2013
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page37

should be concurrent negotiation taken place. The
negotiation will be taken place in both consumer
and provider, if both the proposal is same or the
consumer accepts the proposal of the provider then
the service will be provided to the consumer. Web
services [6] used the agreement concept till date.
To provide the web services the provider and the
consumer should make an agreement. The
agreement includes the service to be used and the
resource allocations are described in the agreement.
The consumer can obtain the resource by
negotiation by which the consumer will be satisfied
to have the resource through negotiation. This
provides a resource to be available to most of the
consumers requesting the resource.

3. PRICE AND TIME SLOT
NEGOTIATIONS

Devising an appropriate pricing model for cloud
service reservation is a challenging approach.
Amazon elastic cloud computing (EC2) provides
consumers with both fixed price and flexible price
for the services. On-demand instances allow
consumers to pay a fixed price by the hour without
a long-termcommitment and to start the instances
immediately. With reserved instances, consumers
need to pay a one-time fee for a one- or three-year
term but benefit from paying a discounted hourly
usage fee within the term. Spot instances enable
consumers to bid for unused computing capacity.
Instances are charged at the spot price set by
Amazon. The spot price changes periodically,
depending on the supply and demand for spot
instances. Consumers requests can be fulfilled if
their maximum bid prices are above the spot price
and they can run their applications on the spot
instances for as long as their maximumbid prices
exceed the current spot price. All consumers will
pay the same spot price for that period even if their
maximumbid prices are above the spot price. For
example, if consumers As and Bs maximumbid
prices are $0.8 and $0.82, respectively, and the spot
price is $0.75, then both A and B will pay $0.75.
The advantage of spot instances over the on-
demand and reserved instances is that, by allowing
consumers to flexibly set their maximum bid
prices, consumers can save cost in some situations.
For example, if a consumer specifies a low
maximumbid price and there is a period where the
spot price is less than the consumers maximumbid
price, the consumer can save cost for running
instances during that period. However, even though
spot instances enable consumers to save cost in
some situations through flexible pricing, consumers
generally cannot plan when to start and terminate
their applications. Consumers applications running
on spot instances can potentially be interrupted.
When a consumer is running spot instances and if
the current spot price exceeds the consumers
maximum bid price, the instances will be
terminated without warning. Although consumers
can specify a request validity periodthe length
of time that a consumers request will remain valid,
the consumers request (i.e., start running an
application) will be fulfilled only if the consumers
maximumbid price is above the spot price. This
provides the motivation for designing a mechanism
that will allow a consumer to reserve a preferred
time slot by negotiating with the provider the price
for reserving the time slot. By having such a
negotiation mechanism for flexible pricing of
Cloud resources, providers can benefit frommore
efficient utilization of their resources, and
consumers can benefit fromcost saving in some
situations and having more flexibility in planning
the start and termination times for running their
applications.
In general, the demand for resources tends to
fluctuate with time. Whereas Cloud resources are
more likely to be idle at nonpeak time (e.g., at night
or during weekends), providers may find it difficult
to accept additional requests at peak time (e.g.,
daytime). Hence, providers may prefer to schedule
resources to meet consumers requests at nonpeak
time to reduce the time of having idle resources.
This increases their chance of generating more
revenue. Consumers potentially have the need to
run their applications at any time. Such a
negotiation mechanism provides a means for
consumers to establish contracts with providers to
guarantee that consumers can run their applications
at the reserved time slots without interruption.
Furthermore, the negotiation mechanism should
also allow both providers and consumers to specify
their preferences. For example, providers may
charge a higher price for providing services at peak
time and a lower price at nonpeak time, and
consumers may need to pay a higher (respectively,
lower) price to use a service at more (respectively,
less) desirable time slots. In this work, we devise a
PTN mechanismthat enables both providers and
customers to do the following: 1) specify their
preferences for price and time slot and 2) search for
mutually acceptable prices and time slots.

4. QOS BASED NEGOTIATION

The QoS based negotiation mechanismincludes,
An aggregated utility function
Negotiation strategies

4.1. Utility Functions

A utility function [7] U(x) represents an agents
level of satisfaction for a negotiation outcome x.
Since each Cloud participant has different
preferences for different prices and time slots, a
price utility function, a time-slot utility function,
and an aggregated utility function are used to
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 6 number 1 Dec 2013
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page38

model the preference ordering of each proposal and
each negotiation outcome. A utility function U(x)
represents an agents level of satisfaction for a
negotiation outcome x. Since each Cloud
participant has different preferences for different
prices and time slots, a price utility function, a
time-slot utility function, and an aggregated utility
function are used to model the preference ordering
of each proposal and each negotiation outcome.

4.1.1. Price Utility Function

Consumers provide their preferred price for a
particular service. Consumers provide with the
cheapest price for a service whereas provider wants
to sell the service in a high price. Let IPc and RPc
be the most and least preferred price of a consumer.
Let p be a price that both agents reach an
agreement. For a consumer, the price utility U
c
P
(p)
for P is given as

U
P
C
(P) =

u
min
P
+ (1 u
min
P
) .
RP
c
P
RP
cIP
c
,IP
c
P RP
c
0, otherwise

------
- (1)
For a provider, the price utility U
p
p
(P) is,

U
P
P
(P) =

u
min
P
+ (1 u
min
P
) .
PRP
P
IP
P
RP
P
,RP
P
P IP
P
0, otherwise
-------
- (2)

In (1) and (2), U
P
min
is the minimumutility that
a consumer and a provider receive for reaching a
deal at their respective reserve prices. To
differentiate between not reaching an agreement
and reaching an agreement at the reserve price,
U
P
min
is defined as 0.01. If a consumer or a
provider cannot reach an agreement before its
negotiation deadline, both agents receive a utility
of zero since not reaching an agreement is the
worst possible outcome. The range of the
consumers and providers price utility functions is
{0} [U
P
min
, 1].

4.1.2. Time slot utility function

A consumer can have multiple sets of acceptable
time slot preferences. Here consumers and
providers can give the time slot preferences for a
service. Consider a cloud service at 1P.M is the
most preferred time then the 8 P.M which is the
second most preferred time then 5 P.M is the least
preferred time. Then the provider checks for the
most preferred time first for availability if it is not
available due to traffic then the next preferred time
will be taken or the time between them.
A providers time-slot preferences are based on
the following: 1) service demand; 2) Temporal
ordering; and 3) fitting job size. The provider
prioritizes its time-slot preferences based on the
expected service demand.

Fig. 1 Reservation queue of time slots

The Fig. 1 shows the reservation queue of time
slots. The reservation queue consists of numbered
time indices the shaded indices denotes the reserved
time slots and the blank time indices represent the
unreserved time slots. By having the reserved and
the unreserved time slots it is easy to allocate the
resources to the consumers.
The Fig. 2 shows the multi issue negotiation;
there will be number of consumers waiting for the
cloud resource. The provider allocates the resource
according to the availability of the time and price.
The provider will specify some proposals according
to the availability of the resources. If the proposals
are satisfied by the consumer the agreement will be
made. Else the negotiation will takes place between
the consumer and the provider in which both
consumer and provider are satisfied. If the
consumer is not satisfied then the consumer makes a
proposal. If the proposal fromconsumer is satisfied
by the provider the agreement is made. Else the
negotiation will be takes place till the provider and
the consumer are satisfied with the proposal. Then
the resource will be allocated to the consumer. Else
the negotiation continues or the negotiation will be
dropped.



















Fig. 2 Multi Issue Negotiation

Cons
umer
Cons
umer
Cons
umer
Cloud
Resourc
e

Cloud ServiceProvider
Utility Functions

Price Utility
Function
Time-Slot Utility
Function
Consumers time-slot
utility function
Providers time-slot
utility function
Negotiation Strategy

Tradeoff Algorithm
Concession-Making
Algorithm
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 6 number 1 Dec 2013
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page39

4.2. Negotiation strategies

The negotiation will takes place between the
consumer and the provider for the reservation of the
cloud services. Both agents will negotiate between
the price and time slots with counter proposals
which lead to concession or trade off algorithm.

4.2.1. Tradeoff algorithm

The tradeoff algorithm is used to enhance both
negotiation speed and the aggregated utility. In the
existing, an agent can make one multi issue
proposal in a negotiation round. The tradeoff
algorithms used here are used to make multiple
proposals with each proposal consisting of different
price and time slot that generated the same
aggregated utility. Each proposal will differ either
in price or time or on both. The agent can select the
different combination of the price and time slot by
which the agent utility function will not vary. The
multiple proposals are made by the provider which
differs in price and time.
The consumer can choose from the available
proposals. If the consumer is satisfied with the
given proposal the resource will be allocated to the
consumer. If the consumer is not satisfied with the
available proposals, then the consumer will be
making some proposals with their preferred price
and time.


Fig. 3 Trade off Algorithm

In Fig. 3 the trade off algorithmusage is shown.
The customer with the job and the size of the job
are given. The provider will check the available
resources fromthe entire cloud provider and shows
the available service providers and the price to
utilize the services.

4.2.2. Concession making algorithm
The concession making algorithmdetermines the
amount of concession Utotal for each negotiation
round, which corresponds to the reduction in an
agents expected total utility. Let t, , and be the
negotiation round, the negotiation deadline, and
negotiation strategy, respectively. The negotiation
agent determines the amount of concession
Utotal, and determines its expected utility in the
next round.
The concession making algorithm will make
concessions by which the new proposals can be
made. The consumers who are not satisfied with
the given proposals can give their preferred
proposals. The given proposals will be compared
with the condescend proposals; if it is acceptable
then the service will be given the consumer. Else
the negotiation takes place.

Fig. 4 Concession making Algorithm

If the consumer is not satisfied with the
available proposals, then the concession making
algorithmFig. 4 is used by the provider to make the
concession on the price. And the consumer will
provide with the preferred time and price.

U
total
= U
total
t
.
t

------- (3)

U
total
t+1
= U
total
t
U
total
------- (4)

U
total
- Amount of concession for each
negotiation
round
U
total
t+1
- Expected utility in next round
t - Negotiation round
- Negotiation deadline
- Negotiation strategy
The negotiation between the consumer and the
provider will continue till they reach a agreement.
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 6 number 1 Dec 2013
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page40

Each negotiation round will have some amount of
concession in the price (3) shows the amount of
concession for each negotiation round. (4) Shows
the expected utility in next round.
5. TASK BASED NEGOTIATION

To provide the QoS in the cloud reservations the
task of the consumers should be monitored. The
price and time slot can be obtained from the
provider by which the service will be provided to
the consumers. Since the service is provided to the
consumer the effective QoS is not obtained.
Because when there is a malfunction in the
providing of resources can leads to the quality to
degrade. So the task of the consumer should be
monitored to find the violations in the QoS. When
the task of the consumer is monitored before it is
taking place then the size of the task will be
compared with the consumers cloud memory.
When the service is reserved by the consumer
the service will be provided to the consumer by
comparing the memory of both task and cloud
memory. There will be many consumers requesting
for the same task which should be provided with
the QoS to the consumer, which can be obtained by
getting the task memory initially. Then the task
memory will be compared with the cloud memory
and the consumers with cloud memory greater than
task memory will be selected and execution time
for each consumer will be determined.


Fig. 5 Job allocation

Fig. 5 shows the job allocation to the consumer.
The provider should allocate the resource to the
consumers. The allocation will be done by
considering the job size and the execution time.
After the consumer task is given, the task memory
and the execution time will be identified. Then the
provider will be selected according to the memory
of the task. The cloud with the similar memory will
be selected and the task will be allocated to the
consumer. If the task memory is larger than the
available provider memory then the task will be
dropped fromallocation.
The job allocation is used for the specific job to
be allocated to the consumers, when the job is
specified the size comparison will be taken place
between the available consumers. The consumers
memory will be monitored from the time when
they requested for cloud memory. Then the table
will be formed with the task id task name, task
memory, cloudlet id this denotes the which
consumer is requesting for the service, then cloud
memory, start time of the process and the end time
of the process.


Fig. 6 Comparison of task and cloud memory

Fig. 6 shows the comparison of task and the
cloud memory. The task will be compared with the
available cloud memory and the satisfying cloud
will be selected and displayed.
By having the start time and the end time of the
service to be taken place then the execution time
for the particular process can obtained. By having
the execution time and the cloud memory the job
will be allocated to the consumer. The job will be
compared with each consumer to get the execution
time of the job.
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 6 number 1 Dec 2013
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page41


Fig. 7 Job allocated to consumer

Fig. 7 shows the job allocated to the consumer.
By comparing the job size with the available cloud
memory and the cloud are chosen. Then by
calculating the execution time of the task, the task
will be allocated with the cloud resource to
execute. This improves the effective utilization of
the cloud memory.
By obtaining the execution time, the task with
the less execution time will be considered for the
resource allocation. And the task size is also taken
and compared with the resource available in the
cloud provider. The resource which is nearly equal
to the task, then the particular resource will be
allocated to the consumer requesting for the
resource.
When the task memory is obtained for the
particular cloud memory then the consumers
memory will be checked with the cloud memory
and the execution time will also be compared. The
job having the exact cloud memory will be chosen
and the job will be provided to the consumer. The
QoS is obtained my managing the cloud memory
and the task effectively.

6. CONCLUSION

In this way we have seen how the task is utilized to
improve the QoS of the cloud reservations. The
service is obtained by the consumer through
negotiation of both price and time slot. When the
service is obtained the task which is performed by
the consumer will be obtained and the service will
be provided to the consumer by comparing the task
memory to the consumer cloud memory. The
consumer having the cloud memory more than the
task memory will be selected and the least
minimumcloud memory will be selected first to
provide the service. The consumer with the least
minimummemory will obtain the service. By which
the QoS can be obtained in an effective way in the
cloud reservations.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was supported in part by Mr. K.
Sudhakar, Assistant Professor, Department of
Computer Science and Engineering, Hindusthan
College of Engineering and Technology.

REFERENCES
[1] R. Lawley, M. Luck, K. Decker, T. R. Payne, and L.
Moreau, Automated negotiation between publishers and
consumers of grid notifications, Parallel Process. Lett.,
vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 537548, Dec. 2003.
[2] M. A. Netto, K. Bubendorfer, and R. Buyya, SLA-based
advance reservations with flexible and adaptive time QoS
parameters, in Proc. 5th Int. Conf. Service-Oriented
Comput., Vienna, Austria, Sep. 2007, pp. 119131.
[3] A. Paschke, J . Dietrich, and K. Kuhla, A logic based SLA
management framework, in Proc. SWPW, 4th ISWC,
Galway, Ireland, 2005.
[4] K. M. Sim and B. Shi, Concurrent negotiation and
coordination for Grid resource coallocation, IEEE Trans.
Syst., Man, Cybern. B, Cybern., vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 753
766, May 2010.
[5] K. M. Sim, G-commerce, market-driven G-negotiation
agents and Grid resource management, IEEE Trans. Syst.,
Man, Cybern. B, Cybern., vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 13811394,
Dec. 2006.
[6] Andrieux, K. Czajkowski, A. Dan, K. Keahey, H. Ludwig,
T. Nakata, J. Pruyne, J . Rofrano, S. Tuecke, and M. Xu,
Web Services Agreement Specification (WS-
Agreement), WS-Agreement Specification fromthe Open
Grid Forum (OGF), Mar. 2007. [Online]. Available:
http://ogf.org/documents/GFD.107.pdf
[7] J . Wilkes, Utility functions, prices, and negotiation, in
Market Oriented Grid and Utility Computing, R. Buyya
and K. Bobendorfer, Eds. New York: Wiley, 2009.